Posted on 10/17/2020 11:25:29 AM PDT by Kaslin
I had surveyed that building awhile back
I have seen better basements.
“But the plans were on display…”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”
“Novelty for the sake of novelty is a cancer. It affects all the visual arts. It afflicts music. And it has infected the humanities and social sciences in academia, where it is boosted by the publish or perish syndrome. In mature fields, it is difficult to impossible to find a truly new insight, and one eventually reaches limits on how many years one can spend researching in a desperate attempt to find a new source worthy of being explored. The goal should be to develop erudition and a profound appreciation for a classical canon, and to become a worthy teacher and guide. Instead, we see graduate students and young academics flocking to garbage studies to do something new and, they think, transgressive.”
Bears repeating, so I just did. Excellent summation of exactly what the problem is with new art, architecture, new anything. I truly believe, in music in particular, that there is a period, actually for most arts: music, literature, film, fashion, architecture, etc. that seem to produce what is called a cultural golden age. Like the golden age of music; rock, classical, folk, jazz, etc. that is considered the apex of that particular genre.
This is a generality and art is in the eyes of the beholder, but we reference back to these golden ages, and then attempt to outdo them, to come up with something even more unique than what went before. It leads sometimes to great innovation, sometimes to disastrous results.
However, constantly seeking change for change’s sake, make for some lousy art in the wrong hands. The problem lies in those that would elevate the truly ugly, horrendous, ridiculous end products of bad artists and have these so-called progressive “experts” try to head fake us all into accepting that this (based on common sense and shared values) obviously bad art is somehow marvelous; that it should be admired by all in order to be considered as in with the in-crowd.
Also, as is common with many who are always trying to push boundaries, they will push too far and veer off into obscene and vulgar paths and call it art. This phenomena shows up often in film, art, music (lyrics), and literature, in particular. And the more degenerate a society becomes, the harder it is to remove such horrors from public venues. You’re stuck with it.
I don’t reject all that is new or feel that we are left with nothing to do in life but re-interpret the past. There is much new product out there that is incredibly creative; not everything is a variation on the past. But there is a seemingly innate ability in most humans to be able to weed out the wheat from the chaff. To understand what seems beautiful to the eyes/senses, and what does not, based on a culture’s shared values.
What I resent is when the arbiters of what is art intentionally try to jam down our throats that which is totally bogus art, a fraud on the senses, a pushing for the obviously ugly and/or grotesque in an attempt to make us say that it is really beautiful when we know better.
(Although there are those amongst us, poor souls, that just have bad taste or no taste at all, and they must be considered as the exception to the rule.)
However, those that should or do know better and intentionally try to palm off bad art on the general populace by promoting eyesores that we end up having to put up with, I believe should be summarily executed, metaphorically speaking, for the travesties that they foist upon our sensitivities.
Fie on them; may they be sentenced to living on an island surrounded by everything ugly, to rot there until they too are a decaying part of the sensory pollution they promoted. The problem is, they will probably think they are living in Nirvana, but at least they will be removed from society, to influence it no more.
It was ugly when it was considered “modern”.
It’s still ugly a half century later.
I’d love to see it!
That sounds like dialogue from a comedy movie! :-)
Seems like the colleges were obsessed with this architectural style. Just about every SUNY campus has buildings that look like that.
Nice. A thing of beauty. You have treated it well.
Oooo...love the Springer Front End! :-)
They ain't wrong.
LOL! Or wait, did someone try that? Was it considered postmodern "art"?
I just looked it up. Horrendous! Poor Dr. Carson.
Agreed. I can’t hear the damn television when my wife’s in the kitchen.
When I first heard the term “Brutalist Architecture” I thought it was a joke or a slander. I think “Sovietesque” is a better description.
Write to all the schools of architecture around the world and voice your complaint and suggestion! :-)
Ha! If were only so simple. To be honest, I am not really crazy about much of what is designed now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
