I had always thought, derivitave of my experience with The Rite of Spring, that primitivism was an artstic movement focusing on the roots of civilisation, that tried to paint a picture of the internal chaos that survives us. This is obvious in Stravinsky's discoradnt, atonal, chaotic work. Yet, straight from http://www.primitivism.com, find a slightly diferent story: This is interesting, as to how exactly art can be used as a social tool, or how it can be the precursor of one. Taking moe from taht site, we find that: "Primitivism is the pursuit of ways of life running counter to the development of technology, its alienating antecedents, and the ensemble of changes wrought by both. This site is an exploration into primitivist theory, as well as various works that contribute to an understanding of the tendency." It almost seems like a kind new-ageish, anarchist, liberal phenomenon, if not for that the fact that Stravinksky had basically devised the idea of looking into primitives by his work with the Rite of Spring. Exactly what relation do art and society have, and in this case, could a whole movement, notably political, be derived entirely from a work of art? Do artists always find the ideas, which are then capitalzed by others?