of the real,[49]since for him art is a false relation to reality: nature is the domain of theTrue, art is False.Nietzsche,one of Zerzans favorite thinkers, prefers art to truth claims. When Nietzsche says this, he means thattruth claims are dangerous and a will to power, primitivist claims to truthincluded. Zerzan misreads Nietzsche forhis own ends, and this is why he says that art is a consolation that takes theplace of the genuine article.[50] However, Nietzsches view of art is as powerexternalized, and that which makes something really genuine for someone is theway it corresponds to ones will to power. Instead of asking Is this true? like all metaphysical culture hasdone, Nietzsche asks What is the value of this truth? Who speaks and what does it want from itstruth claim? Art is certainly notneutral, and speaking and writing are forms of art, in Nietzschesunderstanding. Therefore, the will totruth is will to power, in Zerzans work. And power, as truth, has multiple and contradictory effects that are bothliberatory and dominating, as Foucault makes clear. Art is not, and cannot be by its nature,simply dominating, as Zerzan claims. That is why Nietzsche preferred the artist to the man ofconvictions.Zerzanreactively inverts the value art has for todays common Westerners. Art hasbeen traditionally discoursed in the West as opposed to science. Thus if science in the Western world hasspoken for absolute truth (and Zerzan likes this very much, especially when acertain truth serves his taste), art has been speaking for deceit, ambiguityand what is reprehensible for Zerzan it has symbolized various aspects oflife. In this symbolization, art hashelped to commoditize life, with its various effects, even the commoditizing ofculture, and in this regard Zerzan is somewhat coherent in his analysis when hewrites that today culture is commodity and art perhaps the star commodity.[51]One can hardly agree, if thinking from within anarchism, with his contentionthat the critique must be of culture itself, not of its alleged control(Idem). This, again, would be to throwthe baby (culture, including liberation within it) away with the bathwater(forms of cultural domination). Art hasbeen responsible for enlivening liberatory movements worldwide, including thehippie, anti-war movement Zerzan was a part of. Art includes the power to represent, and therefore to representresistance, and to embody it in a collective force.Zerzancontrives art, religion, language and culture as symbolization. He does this because he says that they alldepart from reality, they miss it. Actually, there are many understandings of symbol as referring directlyto reality. Zerzan wants to negatesymbols, but he has to say they exist to claim they must go. He makes no effort, however, to show whatthought or communication is without symbols or language, except when he refersto telepathy as such an example. Clearly, here is another pointer to the fact that Zerzan does not seeany allies to his call against symbolization, how he just thinks that ongoingnegatives toward everything Cultural is his proper activity. Derrick Jensen, at least, when pointing tothe root of all domination in culture, comes closer to specify Western cultureas posing the greatest threat worldwide to nature, and not Culture per se.[52] To speak