Solarp8nk could be an actual thing if it was actually punk in any way. Like a critique of the greenwashing many companies and countries like to do.
Wall-E is ecofuturist, and both depicts capitalism as a social ill, and emphasizes the hard work that the humans put in to make Earth livable again post-apocalypse.
I don't have a point to make, I just like Wall-E
^ᶦⁿ^ ^ᵗʰᶦˢ^ ^ᵉˢˢᵃʸ^ ^ᶦ^ ^ʷᶦˡˡ^
It stars a little movie nerd with a decaying body
^he's^ ^just^ ^like^ ^me^ ^fr^
I have nothing to add, but I liked Wall-E too!
Okay, to be more serious, my main vibe from looking at solarpunk art is that the artists aren't involved in production, especially industrial production. Ultimately, I wonder how production is handled in a solarpunk society. There's essentially two ends of a spectrum: industrial production and artisan production.
Industrial production means factories, and I struggle to find any meaningful difference between a solarpunk factory vs a futuristic factory vs a cyberpunk factory. All futuristic factories converge to a design of being:
And since a society is ultimately organized by how production is handled, then there's really not a whole lot of difference between a solarpunk society and a more generic futuristic society. Less chrome and more trees I guess? From a purely aesthetic perspective, you turn a futuristic factory into a solarpunk factory by photoshopping a bunch of trees right next to the factory and replacing a field of invasive grass with a field of native wildflowers. But the actual interior of the factory would be identical, and a faithful depiction of the interior of a solarpunk factory would be identical to a faithful depiction of the interior of a futuristic factory.
Artisan production is the other end, and that's where the fashy vibes come from, especially when artisan production is artistically extolled by artists living in a settler-colonial society where the ideal form of living is larping as a yeoman homesteading pioneer living on stolen Indigenous land. Even "communal living" doesn't cut it because artisan production can't keep up with industrial production, meaning the outputs of artisan production often goes to the immediate community and the immediate community only. And if you live within a community that lacks the means or ability to produce that particular commodity because your skin color is different or you live in an arid desert? Well, tough shit.
I gotta agree on the artisan production as idealized by people inside settler society often having fashy vibes, especially when people start talking about setting up a commune in the woods for their friends.
Just from image searching a lot of the art does seem to just be futuristic building+trees, but where are the animals? gimme a big field of bison just living their lives next to a towering hive-city without sprawling suburbs and some trees please!
looks at the 180+ comments from a post about how solarpunk sucks and is reactionary
Hexbear is not ready for the post about how cyberpunk sucks and is reactionary.
Yeah but the music is good
Listen, if your hopecore fanfic art doesn’t sufficiently conform to the standards of socialist realism as to please your Soviet’s censors, it’s basically just fascist slop sorry I don’t make the rules
what percentage of solarpunk art contains the people who live in or work in or build its subjects
I looked at google images and it's not close to 0% and I have no idea what's specifically fascist about pictures of solar panels covered in tree leaves if you forget to add the person in overalls holding a hammer.
Oh and btw we're doing Neo-Andean architecture for our socialist society, please make the necessary arrangements.
https://www.thisiscolossal.com/2019/03/freddy-mamanis-neo-andean-architecture/
Solarpunk is just "what if we did futurism with lots of trees or literally just solar panels?"
Futurism is sci-fi (sometimes a little fantasy) and can therefore mesh with any political tendency except maybe the most purist of reactionaries / primitivists.
I'm not sure how you'd even know the people in the place built it. Let's say you have a big shiny complex full of trees and people. If the people built it, do they have to wear overalls and safety helmets or can they wear casual clothes? How can you tell that a person in an image built a structure unless they're actively building it or just finished building it?
[thing you are invested in] is actually somewhat [thing that you would hate to be associated with]
this is just a generic Twitter troll post, right down to the hedging intended to keep the argument going in the replies
solar punk is real but not how its creators envisage it
Yeah, solarpunk is obviously a reactionary aesthetic. You can read the manifestos of its popularizers and very clearly see the class position of the art movement. How is lionizing the artisan and other middle classes, a reduction in productive capacity, and its desire to revive dead art styles outside of their historical context not reactionary? Stop with the solarpunk and "degrowth" and read more Soviet sci-fi and Chinese five-year plans.
putting degrowth in the same category to be dismissed is not serious. this is not the 1980s.
fucked up part is the art isn't even good. it's barely an art movement. it's like, a subreddit at most.
This is fascism because it depicts evil red fash tankie utopia, I am very smart
pushing someone in and out of the frame looney tunes style and watching the fascism alarm go off once the number of mandatory hammer and sickle-wielding workers reaches the minimum threshold
Art is fascist when I assume it doesn't depict humans
Goofy because Solarpunk (while idealist as @[email protected] points out) is more interested in human involvement and labor than any other "-punk" aesthetic.
This thing had 3 comments when I went to bed. Did Yogthos rile up the libs again?
EDIT: Nope, just another struggle session.
It's a nice change of pace from our usual AI struggle session though. :)
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.
