Totalitarian art is brought to the attention by extra-aesthetic means; its association with and dissemination by totalitarianism. It might not otherwise be noteworthy. Any attempt to turn a somehow made-innocent eye on it to find aesthetic value in it is rehabilitating its extra-aesthetic aspect, not its aesthetics.
To do so is a bait-and-switch:
1. An object that is aesthetically uninteresting is given prominence.
2. It is suggested that since this object has prominence it may be aesthetic.
3. It is suggested that this is independent of its extra-aesthetic qualities.
4. Voila! An unaesthetic object of interest only because it has been peddled by totalitarianism is rendered an object of aesthetic regard.
To do so is a bait-and-switch:
1. An object that is aesthetically uninteresting is given prominence.
2. It is suggested that since this object has prominence it may be aesthetic.
3. It is suggested that this is independent of its extra-aesthetic qualities.
4. Voila! An unaesthetic object of interest only because it has been peddled by totalitarianism is rendered an object of aesthetic regard.
