What is the purpose of art? The question may be of little interest to most since the answer seems so obvious. We have been told over and over, in school and elsewhere, that the purpose of art is “self-expression,” but is it really? Perhaps that is the case for our own modest and private individual creations, but those are not representative of the art we are exposed to day in and day out. The art we most often come into contact with is deceptively called “entertainment,” “popular music,” “bestsellers,” and nobody questions its function in any artistic sense—it is just there. Its value has traditionally been determined by how much money it made or what someone paid for it, but the fact that modern “art” (be it in the form of movies, music, books, etc.,) regularly loses money, is increasingly disgusting, and is now overtly hostile to white people, seems to make clear that its purpose is to depress and mock white people and popularize attitudes and lifestyles that are damaging to the greater white family. Supposed “high-brow” fare is little better. I have recently come to realize that many of the modern poets, painters, and writers I learned about in school or heard about through the media, whom I once believed to be great artists even if they were not to my taste, were actually frauds and dupes created or promoted by the system. While I always had trouble enjoying their work, I did not question their status or achievements, because I saw them as mostly harmless and weird individuals expressing their own warped views of life. However, I now see these mental-cases and degenerates more clearly as useful idiots who did not care that their popularizing of perversity and alienation was assisting an anti-white agenda.
What I failed to realize was that these so-called “artists” were, in fact, placeholders occupying spaces intended for real artists whose form was more true to Western ideals. Such spaces cannot be merely left empty; every country produces its own artists, and it would set off alarms if a state or nation had none. It is difficult for most to differentiate between good art from bad, or see contemporary artists for who they really are, due to the excessive acclaim these imposters receive. Average people play along and fool themselves into believing that they enjoy nonsensical and depressing garbage-art, or prefer this garbage-art over that garbage-art because it is slightly less offensive or a bit more comprehensible. We have been “entertained” by garbage for so long that we have forgotten what art really is, and in turn have diminished expectations of artists. The purpose of art is to inspire and educate, and the role of the artist is to serve his people, his past, and the legacy he is continuing. The man in the street senses the truth, but does not have the time or skill with words, instruments, or paint to convey what he feels through them so that he and others can better understand the world. It is the duty of the white artist to do this—to present the common white man’s problems clearly so that he can recognize them and say: “Yes! That’s it! That is exactly how I feel!” when he sees it, reads it, or hears it. Art is a form of communication, and art that fails to communicate is art that fails. Art is not about self-expression, as we have been told, it is about racial expression. Self-expression is yet another product of the cult of individualism that has long succeeded in isolating whites and convincing them that we are not all brothers. If white-positive artists do not reach white people, anti-white artists will continue to fill that void, as they almost exclusively have done. They will paint a picture for the man in the street that suggests he is evil and should not fight back against the forces marshalled against him, and the man in the street will unconsciously say to himself: “This must be correct. I recognize myself in this art, and should accept that I am evil and should not exist.”
If you look at Renaissance paintings, you will discover the work of true artists—and I am referring not only to their technical skills, but the intent of their art. These artists happily spent much of their lives painting pictures of Christ and other religious figures since, as Christians, Europeans saw the Christ and the saints being glorified and portrayed as European in appearance, meaning they saw in such works a glorification of themselves and their race. This was, of course, more subconscious than conscious in most, because Europeans at the time were not collectively demonized or under threat, and had no need to see themselves as “white.” These artists may not have been very religious themselves, but the Christ they depicted so strikingly through art became more real for individuals, enhanced their faith, and remain images that provide us with collective visualizations of Christ’s appearance and the major scenes of his life. Another significant theme among Renaissance painters, which they shared with sculptors of the Classical Age, was the depiction of nude pagan gods. Just as Christ stood as a model for the spirit and intelligence of the white race, so did the beauty of the bare white body celebrate the physical beauty and strength of the white race. Art of this type was not viewed as sinful or sexual whatsoever, as the viewers were expected to be sophisticated enough to view the nude white body as a work of art in itself, and appreciate its role in fitness and reproduction. The reason for the hostility directed at Western statues and figurative art by non-whites is no mystery; regardless of what they claim, it is an (understandable) reaction from peoples who do not value grace and intelligence as evidenced through artistic representations of the white male and female face and body, but are instead provoked to anger and envy.
When whites were a confident majority, it was easy to find white people who could fill the role of the false artist and extol deviant sexuality and drug use in the name of “freedom.” Now, as the displacement of whites reaches unprecedented levels, the talentless white people the media and academia once celebrated appear to be no longer needed, and even less talented non-whites have been feted for their replacement. White artists of today can save themselves a lot of grief and heartache by understanding and accepting this state of affairs. No matter how good your art is, it will never be appreciated: you will not win prizes, be featured by mainstream institutions, or become wildly rich like white artists of the past. That may be unfortunate, but it is the reality, and you must face it—real art can only exist as dissident art in the current age, but the need for such art has never been greater than now. The poetic and symbolical language of the arts is one of the few forms of free speech we have left, and if you have ever thought about becoming an artist, a writer, or a musician, the time has come for you to take up the mantle. Your people need you to.
I thought I had an array of talent when I was younger, but I did not pursue an artistic, musical, or literary career because I did not see an avenue into any art scene. It seemed to me that to be an artist, or poet or musician one was required to be gay, a feminist or a drug user, or altogether seriously disturbed. I could not imagine integrating myself into any such communities of artists, seeking their admiration, or sharing their concerns. At the time, what was going on was less clear, but I see now that the problem was that I was simply too normal and white. However, it is now beyond obvious because the pretense has been dropped. Anti-whiteness has been around for hundreds of years in white nations—under the guise of anti-Christian, anti-Catholic, anti-German, anti-male, anti-capitalist, or any other form through which animus was directed at some white group and designed to fracture white people and societies—but now that whites are fewer in number and fully indoctrinated to never take their own side,the zeitgeist is plainly and openly anti-white. Like a crack of light in a sky of black clouds, however, there is finally a demand and opportunities for pro-white artists to assume their historic role as voices for the voiceless. Websites and publishers are seeking out content creators, and it has never been easier to start one’s own.
Artists alone will popularize pro-white ideas and enable viable political organizations and movements to emerge one day. Dissident art will not match the achievements of the Renaissance overnight, but we are effectively rebuilding our culture, and should be realistic about what we can accomplish in our lifetimes. Technical skills will develop in due time, and much must be relearned from scratch, but you learn best by doing and getting feedback. Assuredly, there will be many technically skilled young artists who will want to draw, make music, or write without making any sacrifices, who won’t be able to think for themselves or take a stand for something controversial, and who will thus go along with whatever is most socially acceptable. They will be happy to prostitute their skills and no one will criticize them for it, because that is what our soulless society wants them to do. However, many will also not do that, either because they are not given the opportunities, cannot afford to not do it, or are ideologically unwilling to. Those will be the first real artists whites have had as representatives in a long time. And eventually the audience will follow. It is an audience that will be there for the taking, and it will be a good audience, since it will be one comprised of people who have willingly chosen beauty over smut. Most still don’t realize that there is a choice, but I have no doubt that in the future, if there is one for white people, the artists, poets, and writers now celebrated by the media and academia will be remembered with utter contempt.
Charlie Chisholm is an illustrator whose work is often featured at eurocanadian.ca, and is the author and illustrator of the book A People Called American, published by The White People’s Press in 2021.