The Odyssey as a Culture War Proxy

by | Jul 31, 2026 | Culture | 0 comments

Culture Brief 2026-07-31

Ideas in Circulation

The Odyssey as a Culture War Proxy

Homer’s epic has become the unexpected arena for a fight about who owns classical texts, what fidelity to sources means, and whether popular adaptation deserves serious scholarly engagement.

Emily Wilson’s LRB essay panning Nolan’s screenplay — written by the translator whose 2017 edition influenced the film — has detonated a dispute that spreads well beyond the movie. The argument has three layers worth tracking separately: a scholarly claim that Nolan flattens the epic’s moral complexity (notably its women), a celebrity pile-on in which Joyce Carol Oates accused Wilson of ingratitude and “the crude language of Maga folks,” and a deeper question about whether a translator’s interpretive authority extends to derivative works made from her translation. What makes this durable is that Wilson is arguing not as a gatekeeping classicist but as someone who believes the text can do more than Hollywood let it. The Paris Review’s redux of Wilson and Daniel Mendelsohn’s earlier exchanges grounds what is quickly becoming a media fracas in something genuinely interesting: how Odysseus’s famous protean self-invention reads differently depending on which tradition you bring to it.

State Control of Cultural Institutions

The Trump administration’s reshaping of museum programming and federal preservation rules is producing a distinct strand of argument about what governments are actually doing when they curate national culture.

The story here is not simply censorship but replacement: the Smithsonian “patriotic exhibition” mounted after the administration claimed institutional bias is documented to include work by artists with personal ties to the exhibition’s planners. The federal preservation rule changes, meanwhile, would expedite demolitions convenient to the administration’s redesign of Washington. Taken together, these moves constitute something more systematic than a culture war gesture — they are an attempt to use the infrastructure of public culture to produce a specific aesthetic and historical narrative. The Smithsonian director story provides the human continuity: this is now a pattern with a playbook.

The BTS-Grammy Dispute and the Politics of Musical Taxonomy

K-pop’s biggest act has rejected a new Grammy category created for them, and the refusal is more analytically interesting than the boycott framing suggests.

The Recording Academy’s creation of a “best Asian pop music performance” category was presumably intended to recognize K-pop’s commercial dominance, but BTS’s refusal frames it as segregation — a separate-but-unequal category that relieves the Academy of having to integrate Asian artists into the main competitive field. This is the same argument that has circulated around Latin and rap categories for decades, but BTS’s scale gives it unusual leverage: the group’s Arirang is a genuine contender for album of the year, and their absence tests whether the Academy will feel pressure or relief. Worth watching over the next six months as other Asian artists declare positions.

What Pop Art Actually Was — and Whether It Had Politics

The Guggenheim’s major survey has provoked substantive critical disagreement about whether Pop Art possessed the social conscience that contemporary exhibitions keep trying to attribute to it.

The NYT critic argues the Guggenheim show attempts to extract from the movement a critique of consumerism it never intended, retrofitting political conscience onto work that was largely content to celebrate or ironize the surfaces it depicted. This is not a new argument, but the moment makes it freshly pointed: in a cultural climate where institutional self-justification runs high, the question of whether Pop Art was ever actually critical or always essentially decorative has implications beyond art history. The essay is worth reading as a specimen of how museums are currently constructing their own legitimacy through curatorial framing.

The Technocratic International Under Siege

A philosophical challenge to the authority of expert-led international bodies is circulating at the level of political theory, not just populist complaint.

Jan Eijking’s Aeon essay argues that international organizations wield genuine political power while insisting they are merely implementing technical conclusions — a structural deception that forecloses democratic accountability. The argument is not anti-expertise per se but anti-laundering: the claim is that hard political choices are being disguised as scientific outputs, and that this disguise is itself a form of governance. This is the intellectual-register version of a much louder political argument, and essays like this one tend to surface about eighteen months before the argument moves into mainstream policy discourse.

—

Books, Film, Music, Art Worth Attention

Shaboozey: The Outlaw Cherie Lee & Other Western Tales — A concept album with Hollywood narrators, Pink Floyd-adjacent interludes, and an accompanying comic book that, beneath the apparatus, makes the case that Shaboozey’s crossover wasn’t a fluke.

Jimmy (dir. Yashaddai Owens) — Shot on Bolex in Istanbul and Paris, a portrait of a young James Baldwin before canonization; formally committed to evoking rather than explaining.

The Samurai and the Prisoner (dir. Kiyoshi Kurosawa) — A period piece about a lord and a cunning envoy that uses Kurosawa’s characteristic interest in psychological enclosure; serious filmmaking operating within genre.

Guggenheim Pop: 1960 to Now — Worth seeing as an argument about cultural legacy even if, especially if, you find the curatorial framing unconvincing.

Dread Beat an Blood (restored, 1979) — A newly restored documentary on Linton Kwesi Johnson’s dub-poetry and its documentation of Black Caribbean life in Britain; the restoration makes available a primary source that had been largely inaccessible.

—

Essays Worth the Read

How Art Invented Humanity

J. F. Martel argues the causal arrow runs backward: rather than humans producing art as an expression of pre-formed consciousness, the making of images is what constituted human selfhood in the first place. The essay draws on cave painting and cognitive archaeology to suggest that our sense of interiority emerged from the exteriorization of inner states onto surfaces — which has significant implications for how we think about AI image generation and what exactly is being automated.

The Taming of Black Thought

Takeshi Morisato’s argument is precise and uncomfortable: the inclusion of Black philosophers in Western academic curricula has systematically stripped their ideas of radical content, assimilating dissent into the very tradition it was meant to challenge. The essay is not about representation but about epistemological domestication — how the frame of “world philosophy” converts critique into curriculum.

Artificial Intelligence: Ars Notoria and the Promise of Instant Knowledge

Anne Lawrence-Mathers traces a medieval magical manuscript that promised to fast-track mastery of any discipline through ritual rather than study — a shortcut to knowledge acquisition that got several users accused of demonic pact. The parallel to current AI discourse is handled with restraint precisely because it isn’t stated directly; the essay lets the historical material do its work.

—

One Thing Worth Reading Deeply

The Soothing Unsubtlety of UNBROKEN: The Untold Story of Shen Yun

Paul Thompson’s essay in the Paris Review uses an Epoch Times–produced documentary about Shen Yun as an occasion to think about what crude propaganda feels like to encounter — and why, perversely, its transparency is almost a relief. The piece turns on a genuine observation: at a moment when sophisticated disinformation is ubiquitous, there is something almost clarifying about encountering a film that makes no pretense of balance, that stacks every technique and leaves no doubt about its aim. Thompson doesn’t excuse the propaganda; he uses the encounter to examine what we now expect from manipulation, and what it means that we are better calibrated to detect ham-fisted persuasion than the refined kind. It is a short essay doing the work of a long one.