Dennis Claxton wrote:
>
> Chris wrote:
>
> >look at the break between Breton and
> > > Dali over the latter's sympathy with Franco and Hitler.)
> > >
>
> He also thought Dali was too fond of money. I think this is tempest
> in a teapot stuff though.
It would seem so. It would be more than that if and only if one were to see it as an attempt to flatten out political differences in general, thus (implicitly) legitimizing political quietism. Which is silly -- in the absence of full-scale clearly defined class-war challenging anyone's personal political preferences, including quietism, is mere moralism, itself a deflection from politics. "Which side are you on" is only a relevant question in times of crisis.
Another possibility lifting it out of the realm of triviality would be if the leveling out of political differences were intended to eliminate political questions from the judgment/construal of philosophical or literary works (e.g., Pound's Cantos, Heideggr's philosophy). That goal would have no objective valdiity but i might give internal peace of mind to some individuals.
Carrol