A light-hearted look at "art"

Post Reply
Jim Pennington

A light-hearted look at "art"

Post by Jim Pennington » Fri Dec 05, 2014 8:21 pm

The Art of Contempt
"....And as for the state of that nation — and culture — one good barometer is the kind of art that’s being made today. The view from New York is one of contempt. Do I mean I find the art contemptible? Yes, I certainly do, but more than that I feel that contempt is the only emotion conveyed by this art, the only emotion felt by its creators, and indeed the full intent and compass of the works.

And when you look at it that way, they are doing a fine job.

My experience at The Drawing Center in SoHo sums it up. There was precious little of anything you could call “drawing” there, but I suppose breaking boundaries is a given these days. Mostly on show were textiles ranging from unimpressive to insipid to downright silly. What art there was could be found on the placards explaining the works. One choice example:

ImageWell, I didn’t see any “dialog”, though I’m not sure how I would have recognized it.

The work itself looked like a melted stack of black Glad bags over a dog-chewed rag rug, no need to show it here, there’s nothing in it.

Nothing but contempt that is. Remember, this was in One Percent Central, an august zone of stratospheric wealth. This is the art that serves the global elite, as much as the Sistine ceiling served the Pope. They fund the galleries and foundations that make this possible, and perhaps even buy these works from time to time to display on their own walls. I have to assume that they find it expressive of their thoughts and feelings, though of course the primary purpose is to show their wealth by its profligate waste (I can get them a version of Worry Rug I for $14.95, though I can’t promise it’ll have the flair of the original).

The elites of the past used art as propaganda to display their superiority and cement their rule. The pharaohs overawed the simple with pyramids and monoliths, while medieval cathedrals offered them a vision of heaven. Louis XIV had his Versailles, even communists found it necessary to create Socialist Realism. But how does Worry Rug I serve this goal? These poor sad one percenters of today are joined at the hip to an ideology of liberal equality, for some reason, which really must be deeply galling to those conscious of their superior merit. How to show it? Contempt! Contempt for you and me, contempt for the eye, and the sensual, which can never be bought but only felt.

And just down the street from The Drawing Center, an unnamed gallery offers the pièce de résistance, the ultimate in contempt:Image

Social criticism has long been a part of art, since the Romantics at least, but it’s been with a view to improving society, to curing its ills and bettering mankind. In other words, to further the promise of the Enlightenment and liberalism generally. I don’t think the above explosive critique of society has any such noble sentiment, because it’s quite clear to me that nobody really believes in this vision any more, and the ultimate failure of this multi-century program can only be due to the masses’ failure to step up to the challenge. So fuck off losers! The elites deserve their rule not because of their superiority but because the rest of us are losers. Thanks, thanks for that.

Agnostic says:
December 3, 2014 at 12:13 am

The Pope, the Pharaoh, and the Medieval lords and kings were (usually) part of the ethnic group that they ruled over. They shared standards of what was great, and the elite sought to signal how able they were to commission truly great works. They felt paternalism rather than contempt because they were part of the same culture as the peons.

Fast-forward to some Jew “artist” displaying her rags in the city that Wall Street Jews built. None of them are rooted in this country or its major, or even minor, ethnic groups. In fact, they’re not rooted in any country, just shuffling to wherever they can maximize self-interest and group power at the moment. They’re sealed off from the host population, and view it with contempt. “Goyische kopf — they just don’t get modern art!” Bunch of bald-faced, visual retards.

How conscious are they are their isolation and antagonism? Sam Moyer was one of a number of artists whose works were shown in an exhibit called Jew York — no joke, an exhibit to showcase the works of NYC Jews. “Get it? We’re doing that ironic self-deprecating thing!” (“Just kidding, we know we run this place, and you dumb goy peasants can go suck it.”)

Jews have little visual sense, which explains why their art looks so awful. But that doesn’t explain why it has to be so antagonistic as well — that comes from their being the most nakedly chauvinistic ethnic group in world history.

You know how there are Jews in the extreme libertarian camp, as well as in the extreme Communist camp? And how each camp of Jews tries to apologize for its enemies in the other camp? (“As a Communist Jew, I sincerely regret my ethnic group shamefully producing so many libertarians.”)

Well, where are the Jews singling out how awful and corrosive their “artists” are? They wouldn’t even have to apologize to the goy host population — just publicly call them out for being loathsome talentless posers. That will keep them from making a living from contemptuous art, while not alerting the unaware goyim how Jew-y these contemptible artists are and risking another pogrom (always the #1 worry when a Jew is planning to call out a group of Jews).

Eddie Pensier says:
December 3, 2014 at 1:53 am

You are such a champion asshole.

Agnostic says:
December 3, 2014 at 11:55 am

How dare someone point out the obvious about Jewish art? — that it is not very good, owing to their low visual intelligence (their famous high IQs are due to high verbal skills, e.g. the gobbledygook explaining what the art is meant to convey), and that it tends toward contempt for the host population.

In your panty-twisted reactions, you missed a little of the logic. Of artists who make contempt one of the main emotions, what fraction are Jewish? Pretty high. What fraction of artists overall are Jewish? Pretty low, Jews preferring verbal and musical media. Why are Jews so over-represented among contemptuous artists? Because of their fuck-you-goy chauvinism. (If their ramped up ethnocentrism is news to you, you’re an insulated hick.)

Rodgers & Hammerstein and Simon & Garfunkel are the exceptions that prove the rule — that Jews have always identified more with black, urban culture. They were way more into jazz, both in its Jazz Age and Bebop stages, than they were into earnest Anglo folk music. Still bragging about having “marched in Selma” against the racist goy bigots.

I welcome alternative explanations for why Jews are so likely to lie under the surface when you scratch away at works of Contemptuous High Art, and why so few fellow Jews are willing to criticize that phenomenon, unlike the willingness of Commie Jews to savage the libertarian Jews and vice versa.

Trying to pull the curtains over the whole thing, though, is shameful. You style yourselves as against political correctness and angry at artists whose driving value is contempt for the community the work is made for. Just as long as the trail never leads to the most wealthy and powerful ethnic group. Shameful.

http://uncouthreflections.com/2014/12/0 ... ight-pt-i/

User avatar
Wade Hampton III
Posts: 2339
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 10:40 pm
Location: Pontiac, SC

Re: A light-hearted look at "art"

Post by Wade Hampton III » Fri Dec 05, 2014 9:56 pm

If you please...just exactly what in the hell is this supposed to be a picture of???

:?:
Jew-Puke
Jew-Puke
what-the-hell.JPG (14.34 KiB) Viewed 6662 times
Is that a TV in the background? Be assured I disconnected cable almost two years ago!

Post Reply