But why? I was reading a fairly vacuous art history book and they drop all this knowledge and then do 0 analysis of it. Feels like they’re saying “teehee, ain’t it so quirky?” Their best guess was to counter Socialist Realism and to promote the US as an art powerhouse, a vision of artistic freedom!!! Is that the materialist interpretation?
E: Thanks for all the thoughtful responses. Genuinely. When I write that it sounds corporate, but I mean it
With nearly infinite money and a remit to “do anything” to fight communism. There’s no reason not to.
Heck, there’s a whole genre of books/podcasts about all the wacky shit the CIA got up to what with their gay bombs and cats with radio transmitters implanted in their heads and LSD mind control and remote sensing.
the “gay bomb” in particular was a proposal somebody submitted and supposedly didn’t go anywhere
I’m operating from the assumption that enemies of the Soviet union were competent, educated professionals. I know we have a lot of failsons and daughters nowadays, but I think (with absolutely nothing to back this up, please prove me wrong) that anti communists used to do more than spread bad vibes. There was concerted real effort to change culture and “common sense”.
That is true, but the kind of culture war that they were waging is one that lacked successful precedent, so it makes sense to experiment with things that you are pretty sure won’t backfire just to see if they end up being effective.