The Four American Conservative Aesthetic Styles

The aesthetics of the groups that make up today's American right - and what they tell us.

One way to understand a movement is through its aesthetics. There are four principal aesthetic styles on the American right, which give insight into the various groups comprising it. These styles are: retro-Americana, techno-futurist, neofascist, and MAGA.

Retro-Americana, techno-futurist, and neofascist are managerial aesthetics, reflective of educated, leadership classes - though very different and often opposed groups to be sure. MAGA aesthetics are non-managerial, reflecting the masses or working class right. This divide is significant, as I’ll explain after reviewing each of them.

Retro-Americana

As an aesthetic style, retro-Americana is in a sense the most conservative. There are two basic flavors of this: traditional American aesthetics and neoclassical aesthetics. These are both primarily preferences of the educated classes in conservatism, but could be thought of as the “civilian” and “professional” varieties. Traditional American aesthetics, often with a retro flair, appeals to educated conservative voters and donors, whereas neoclassical aesthetics with a fine arts sensibility is the de facto aesthetic system of movement conservative elites.

The traditional American wing would celebrate things like the classic American small town. Ironically, many of these, as in the picture below, are now very liberal enclaves.

Middlebury, VT. Photo credit: Jd4508/Wikimedia, CC BY-SA 3.0

I call this style “retro” not just because it is rooted in the past, but because there often is a self-consciously retro aspect to it, as in these types of images:

Norman Rockwell, of course, is a favorite here. The homesteading or “trad wife” aesthetic counts here.

While not in the explicitly retro category, the superb aesthetics of the LDS Church (Mormons) are an exemplar here. We can see it in this Romney family Christmas card photo from last year.

Movement conservatism - the New York and Washington think tank and magazine world - tends to eschew this aesthetics in favor of neoclassicism. I just interviewed Justin Shubow of the National Civic Art Society for my podcast. He was one of the people behind President Trump’s move to require classical architecture on federal buildings. He’s a great example of this. You also see it in this Eugene Kontorovich article about the use of the fasces on federal buildings and structures that explains they were included as classical, not fascist elements. Or you can think about Notre Dame architect Duncan Stoik’s churches that look like traditional churches. Here is his new chapel at Hillsdale College, for example:

Nave of Christ Chapel, Hillsdale College. Duncan Stroik architect. Photo credit: Dclemens1971/Wikimedia, CC BY 4.0

It’s also seen in the way movement conservative people tend to be into opera, a niche pursuit to put it mildly. In fact, magazines like the New Criterion and City Journal publish opera reviews. These typically argue in favor of traditional productions and against regietheater (avant-garde European) ones.

One of the hallmarks of the conservative movement is its rejection of the modern. This generally applies to both retro-Americana groups. They tend to hate all forms of modern art and architecture apart from Art Deco, and are the people who tell you they want to “RETVRN.”

In this they are often curmudgeons if not outright philistines. We see this in a 2000 City Journal article in which Myron Magnet makes the case for demolishing New York’s Lincoln Center and replacing it with a new set of classical buildings. While some of the buildings aren’t great, the Metropolitan Opera House is one of the world’s great opera houses. The idea of demolishing it and replacing it with a no doubt boring and derivative classical structure that would simply look second rate in comparison with European houses is nutty.

Interestingly, the original neoconservatives appear to have been very interested in the aesthetic avant-garde in their Partisan Review magazine days. No surprise they were very intellectually dynamic as well. The total rejection of the modern by today’s conservatives is a sign of deeper underlying problems that prevent them from innovating.

Perhaps that’s the very nature of conservatism, but as we’ll see next, there can be a right wing with a more forward-looking attitude.

Techno-Futurism

Techno-futurism is an essentially science fiction type aesthetic associated with the Silicon Valley right, and the neoreactionary movement spawned by Curtis Yarvin (himself a technologist) and others.

In some ways techno-futurism is the opposite of retro-Americana. It’s futuristic, not traditional. And most of it has no obvious tie to America or its culture.