My family and I enjoyed a great trip to New York City this past week. One of the things I like doing with my kids is teaching them economics through art. The Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) offered great opportunities for this.
First were the photographs by Boris Mikhailov, a Ukranian-born photographer now living in Russia. Images from his "Case History" series on display documented the homeless population in Kharkov, a city in the Ukraine, years after the collapse of communism. As Mikhailov notes,
“Devastation [from the failures of communism] had stopped. The city had acquired an almost modern European centre. Much had been restored. Life became more beautiful and active, outwardly (with a lot of foreign advertisements)—simply a shiny wrapper. But I was shocked by the big number of homeless (before they had not been there). The rich and the homeless—the new classes of a new society—this was, as we had been taught, one of the features of capitalism.”
My son was understandably shocked by the photographs. (He had gone on ahead of 
us and we had no idea what this exhibit had on display.) I was able to discuss with them first, the tragedy of extreme poverty exhibited by these photographs, and that povery occurs in any society. There are people who are unable or unwilling to care for themselves regardless of the socio-economic system. Under communism, everyone was certainly taken care of (depending on how you use that phrase "taken care of"), but they were miserably poor. Mikhailov acknowledges that. After the communist regime collapses, most people became richer and the human condition improved, but a few were and still are unable to care for themselves; they have become homeless.
I also explained to my kids the importance of institutions (i.e., sound government) and that a) path dependence and culture can create dependency for generations, which can breed homelessness, and b) Russia is hardly a free market economic system for judging the results of free markets. A social safety net may indeed be needed, but it is certainly lacking in Russia. However, people make choices, and when there is a safety net to catch us when we fall, no matter how weak is that safety net, we risk the possibility that the safety net becomes a hammock.
It was also disturbing to see so many photographs of women obviously of some mental deficiency exposing themselves for the photographer. If this wasn't abusive on the photographer's part, it bordered on it.
This notion of choice brought us to another piece of art that intrigued me, Otto Dix's "The Nun." Here 
Dix vividly illustrates the concept of choice, the opportunity cost that choosing entails, and the possibility of regret. The nun is obviously distraught and sad as she contemplates the ultimate sacrifice she made to pursue her faith to the extreme - she gave up earthly delights to beame a nun. Looking at the picture we see to the right of her face a pregnant woman and to the left a vulval shape. Just above her head to the left is Christ appearing to be crucified on the cross. (Is she feeling cruicified?) The nun made the ultimate sacrifice to pursue her faith - forswearing motherhood and the pleasures of intimacy that go with that. Life is about tradeoffs however, and though most of our choices don't produce the extreme angst depicted in this painting of the nun, we still make many life altering decisions throughout our lifetimes. Should I finish high school? Should I go on to college. What do I want to be? Should I marry? And to whom? What do I give up if I choose to marry one pursuer rather than another? (Remember, perfection is not possible, so when deciding whether to marry someone rather than stay single and keep looking, you have to settle for "they're good enough that it's not worth the additional time searching for a more perfect spouse." I think my wife understand this.) Sometimes we experience regret or remorse about our choices, but they are just that - our choices - and we must live with the consequences.
Lastly, looking at this painting of Gauguin's "Washerwomen," I was reminded of Hans Rosling's video about his family buying their first automatic washing machine and about how much more dynamic our lives have become and progressed. We are so much better off today than even just a decade ago in terms of work and the human condition. We have so much today that makes our lives so much easier and enjoyable, and that's good. But I was also thrown back to Boris Mikhailov's 
photographs. The artist is a social critic and his or her job is to not only reveal beauty in life and nature and objects, especially those mundane things we so often overlook, but it's also to expose the drudgery of life - our misery and our human failings. Compare 
Gauguin's work of 1888 with this contemporary photograph of how clothes get washed today in my household. (It's actually from an advertisement.) I don't know, I kinda like the photograph of the washing machine, but I believe it just doesn't have the same appeal as Gauguin's women toiling in the river. Gauguin's depiction seems like, well, so old and romantic. Why?!?
But I do know this: I'm far more appreciative of capitalism, despite all it's failings, after I see depictions today of what life was like even just a short period ago or in different countries right now.
