In a post I wrote last month about individual freedom from an artist’s perspective, a member criticized the work of a famous performance artist as being just a bunch of pseudo-intellectualism—not real art. She called herself a traditional classical realist, so it would follow that she wouldn’t be too keen on abstract expressionism, even the powerful works of art like those by Franz Marc (one of my favorites).

That post got me thinking about the conservative community’s commitment to traditions, particularly in the art world. I find that among many conservatives, non-traditional art is too often met with silence or scorn for three reasons. First, some modern art is admittedly offensive, immoral, and blatantly designed to attack conservative values—and it gets government funding. Second, modern art springs from humanistic philosophies that inspire leftist politics. Finally, according to classical critics (especially those familiar with G.K. Chesterton), art is determined by the cumulative counsel of the ancients, not by the individualistic expression of the artist.

While the first two reasons make it clear why caution is warranted when considering modern art (particularly its substance), I would like to focus on the third reason and how conservatives often confuse the “cumulative counsel of the ancients” or “traditions of men” with absolute truth that is binding for all cultures, all people, and all times.