89
Solar Punk is just another version of the Nordic model
(lemmygrad.ml)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2025
89 points (91.6% liked)
chapotraphouse
13937 readers
681 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
No, but I'll give you that it's an attempt at a depiction of farming by somebody who's never seen a farm. Take your win.
so your problem is just that the particular picture is bad at depicting labour, and not the solar-punk aesthetic?
what about this art of solar-punk farm labour?
Again, we see farmland that's completely devoid of people here. I find it incredible how people latched onto aesthetic from a diary commercial in favor of actual labour aesthetic. Let's compare this with some art that actually celebrates farming and labour:
my bad, i forgot it is required to open the image in a separate tab to get a better look at the HD image
i agree that art made specifically to celebrate labourers has them central stage unlike these enviromental landscape shots, but that is different than what you said "labour is entirely invisible in pretty much all the solar-punk aesthetic" when many pieces of solar-punk art show the laborers within the art
Again making my point for me here. The workers are distant and hidden in the picture, where you have to play where's waldo to find them. They're just part of the background scenery if they're present at all. Tastefully hidden away in the painting.
Here's my question to you. What is the value that solar-punk brings to the table over socialist realism. Why based the aesthetic on a diary commercial, when there's a huge wealth of socialist art available to draw on. Surely we can draw inspiration from actual socialist art when imagining the future instead of corporate aesthetics?
Here's a North Korean painting of a field, with the workers being distant:
Here's another North Korean painting without a focus on people:
Here's a Chinese painting, one which is also clearly taking inspiration from traditional East Asian painting traditions:
Okay, this I find somewhat more agreeable, I love me some socialist realism and wish we had more of it in the modern day... but like, let people draw their cute little fields and houses. I wish a lot of the art field was different from what it was, but that's a purely subjective, selfish value judgement of me wanting more of the art I enjoy and less of the art I don't enjoy, not a functional political program.
When you're in power you can put this in the state censorship guidelines and have those dang solarpunk fascists all shot or whatever. Doesn't seem like a particularly productive approach to building socialism, but you know, you do you.
Okay, but the whole 70 gajilion comment argument you've gotten in is with people, like me, who believe Soviet art has a greater diversity than just "workers workers workers, all day, just working", and we have worked to give you numerous examples of such art.
Here's a modern Chinese artist who I would consider to be working in something we might call Contemporary Socialist Realism - Fan Wennan. They're not your typical solarpunk fare, as they tend to feature some rather massive constructions rather than quaint little farms in the middle of nowhere, but they also often don't feature any focus on workers.
There are a handful more in the tradition of workers being framed centrally that you want, but the majority are more like the above examples.
This is clearly inspired by actual Soviet art - and yet, it still would not fit your expectation, because you've selectively latched onto one sub-genre of Soviet art and declared that to be the one and only true form of it, to the ignorance of all else that Soviet (and Chinese, and Korean, and Vietnamese, etc.) artists did.
Landscape painting is its own genre, with its own conventions, and generally does not feature a focus on the people in-frame - and when it does, usually the person is portrayed in contemplation or awe of the landscape, as in the famous Wanderer above the Sea of Fog. Should we outlaw this entire genre? Actual socialist countries did not, so you have a more hardline stance any socialist government!
I would agree that there should be more solarpunk depicting a focus on workers - but this thread started with the maximalist assumption of "most solarpunk does not feature people" (trivially disproven by multiple paintings posted by others, at which point you pivoted to yeah, but those people aren't workers, and then once another poster disproved that, you pivoted to um, they're portrayed wrong - this is clearly bourgeois leisure berry-picking and not agricultural fruit harvesting, because, uh... and ad-hominem arguments about people having never "set a foot on a farm"), and "paintings of landscapes that aren't focused on people are fascistic", which is a rather extreme statement, given that, again, landscape painting is a genre that exists, and has been partaken in by many socialist artists.
Maybe if you'd opened up with something less inflammatory, this thread would have gone differently, and led to some more productive discussions (well, it was pretty productive to me, I've added like 30 cute little paintings to my image collection).
As I've mentioned in other comments, my main criticism is not with how narrow it is. Socialist realism has has a range that encompasses what solar-punk is aiming at, but extends far beyond that. It offers a holistic and plausible vision of a socialist world.
Another issue with solar-punk is that it's very superficial in nature and doesn't really offer a realistic representation of what a society powered by renewables might look like. For example, this is what real life solar farms look like today in China:
Solar-punk vastly understates the role of technology in its vision, it doesn't discuss how this technology would be produced. It's just an utopian vision that, in my opinion, creates skewed expectations. Since solar-punk is meant to be political art it deserves to be critiqued on the vision it promotes. The tweet I used as a discussion starter might be inflammatory, but I think the core point it makes is worth discussing.
how do you have a worker front and center in a landscape painting where the POV is a thousand feet in the air? of course everyone looks small from thousands of feet in the air, not all soviet art had someone in the middle of the frame either
the two art styles are not competing, they are good for different things, socialist realism is good for celebrating the worker, solar-punk is good for dreaming of a hopeful and more ecologically sustainable future in the same way old soviet sci-fi was, reimagined for a new time that is more ecologically conscious. just because a corporation co-opts an aesthetic does not mean it owns it, just that the aesthetic was powerful enough to co-opt
I've already addressed this point the first time you posted this pic https://lemmygrad.ml/post/8502357/6685007
And my point is that dreams of a hopeful and more ecologically sustainable future should draw on actual existing socialism, and recognize the work that goes into building that future. As I've said, in a comment after comment in this thread, the issue isn't with what solar-punk depicts, it's with what it's missing. The constructive thing to do would be to honestly acknowledge what's missing, and work to expand the aesthetic to include that.
solar-punk isn't missing labour in the same way soviet sci-fi art isn't missing labour, a zoomed out POV focusing on a future landscape =/= invisible since the labourers are explicitly added into the art, and you don't consider soviet sci-fi to be another version of the nordic model, right?
Again, if the range of solar-punk was to include visible labour that's celebrated then I would agree. I must've explained this point a dozen times in this thread, and you just keep ignoring it. It's as if you don't actually honestly want to engage with what's being said to you.
can you tell me what i haven't honestly engaged with? you say that solar-punk doesn't include the workers in high detail in its landscape art, and i'm saying that soviet sci-fi does the exact same thing, because it's centered on future landscapes just like solar-punk
You haven't honestly engaged with my point that the difference between socialist realism and solar-punk is that social realism both includes aspects similar to solar-punk such as the Soviet sci-fi pictures you keep posting here as well as celebration of workers. The range of art includes many different aspects of a socialist society painting a convincing picture that's holistic. Meanwhile, solar-punk focuses on a narrow aspect of society leaving much to interpretation making it compatible with socialism or other social/economic models. Hence the title for the post.
soviet sci-fi is not under the umbrella of social realism, and how is an sustainable future with a repairing climate compatible with capitalism?
Really going to argue this isn't socialist realism are you?
What does this have to do with anything I said?
that is socialist realism, but an artistic interpretation of a real rocket isn't sci-fi
you said right here that solar-punk, an aesthetic that focuses on a sustainable future with a repairing climate is compatible with other social/economic models, or as you said in the title, the nordic model, which is capitalism
Evidently you haven't seen what a real rocket looks like.
What I said is that solar-punk is a superficial aesthetic that has no connection to how a socialist society actually functions. The depictions of farming you used as examples earlier are a perfect example of that. By your own admission, they paint a flawed depiction of the subject. The reason being is that this aesthetic isn't created by people actually engaged in this type of labour, and who haven't bothered to even observe it themselves. It's fundamentally hollow, and as such it's compatible with all sort of ideologies. Socialist art is political in nature, and its job is to provide a plausible vision for people to rally around.
those who drew the art you posted were not welders, they were not cosmonauts, and did not observe them judging from the look of the rocket. how can you say the same about solarpunk artists from one flawed piece of art?
solar-punk is political in nature, it posits a ecologically sustainable future, a future without capitalism. do you think a sustainable future with a repairing climate is compatible with the nordic model?
Plenty of socialist artists come from these professions, many others have spent time actually studying the subjects and living with the people they portray. You're just showing your utter ignorance of the subject you're attempting to debate here.
I implore you to actually read the comment you're replying to.
i know artists often have other jobs, i was referring to the art of the welder and the rocket you posted, you can tell it was not made by a cosmonaut judging from the look of the rocket, unless that art piece was made by a cosmonaut?
i have read the comment, you're saying that solar-punk isn't fundamentally political, which i don't see how you think that unless you think combating climate change is fundamentally not a political project, and that a sustainable future is possible without ousting the capitalist hegemony
What I'm actually saying is that solar-punk is fundamentally hollow and lacks substance.
so have you engaged with any solar-punk media like the dispossessed by ursula le guin?
I have, and my point stands. Solar-punk fails to offer a realistic representation of what a society powered by renewables might look like. For example, this is what real life solar farms look like today in China:
It's quite clear that solar-punk vastly understates the role of technology that underpins its vision, and creates skewed expectations. It doesn't discuss how this technology would be produced, completely ignoring the industries and workers that underpin it. In a way, it's kind of ironic that you picked the dispossessed since that's basically what we can infer from solar-punk where we see the idyllic society, but we don't get to see what actually powers it.
solar-punk isn't realistic in the same way soviet sci-fi wasn't realistic, it's an idealistic anti-capitalist future
the dispossessed is as detailed as for instance the inhabited island in how its anarchist society works and how it is powered
what makes anarres society just another version of the nordic model?
Much of Soviet sci-fi art very much did strive for realism and plausibility, that's not at odds with painting an idealistic picture of the future in any way.
Not sure what this has to do with discussing solar-punk aesthetic to be honest. You just keep moving goal posts here.
The critique was of the solar-punk art that depicts a society without showing how the technology is produced. Last I checked, the dispossessed portrays a society that would be best described as anarcho-syndicalism. Anarres is also a highly industrialized society, relying on advanced technology for its survival and coordination. That does not sound like the solar-punk vision presented in the art.
one of the biggest themes of the dispossessed was how the non-hierarchic anarres workers focus on sustainability, it is one of the founding media of the solar-punk movement
how does soviet sci-fi like inhabited island strive for realism and plausibility more than the dispossessed does?
Pretty weird that a book discussing a society that bears no resemblance to solar-punk aesthetic is one of the founding media for the movement. This just further highlights the incoherence of solar-punk art as it doesn't even bear resemblance to the supposed subject matter you're claiming it's drawing inspiration from.
Have I somewhere claimed this to be the foundational media for Soviet sci-fi art?
the art style of modern solar-punk is largely based on earthships https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earthship, but its foundational ideas were largely inspired by the dispossessed
when did i claim that inhabited island was foundational media for soviet sci-fi art? i said the dispossessed was foundational media for the solar-punk movement, and then asked why you said soviet sci-fi art like inhabited island are more realistic and plausible than it. is there another piece of soviet sci-fi you want to use instead as an example for it being more realistic and plausible than the dispossessed?
edit: maximum depth reached, return to the surface for air: hexbear.net/comment/6329112
One would certainly wouldn't get that impression by looking at most solar-punk imagery. Nor does the imagery reflect any aspect of the dispossessed that I can see.
You brought it up as a contrast to me pointing out discrepancies between solar-punk art and what the dispossessed describes. If you agree it's not foundational to Soviet art, then what relevance does it have to the discussion?
There are plenty of examples of Soviet sci-fi that are more realistic and plausible than the dispossessed because Soviet sci-fi was rooted in a real-world socialist system that actually existed as opposed to a purely speculative one the dispossessed describes. Here are a just few prominent examples from the USSR that offer plausible (within their era's understanding) visions of a futuristic socialist society: