Replies

Yeah, but as Steyn points out, Kazan was on the right side of history.

I wasn't crazy about the Nazis...but I loved the way they marched. Leni Reifstall's "Triumph of the Will" was superb.

I saw "Entarte Kunst". Nazi taste in art was execrable. What they banned was magnificent.

On and on like that. To judge art by political standards is to miss the much of the world's beauty and diversity.

Your choice.

To judge art by political standards is to understand political art.

Much art in the form of movies, books, painting and architecture is political or at least reflects the politics of the artist.

To understand Hitlers writing you must understand his politics. If you simply enjoy the way the man puts a sentence together you have fooled yourself into thinking you appreciate art.

To understand his writing is to hate his art, no matter how well the "rules" of the art form are followed.

You come off as a skin deep kind of guy, never understanding what is below the surface, what makes it art. You seem to grasp the semantics, what it is suppose to "sound" like, but never what is actually being said - which is the art.

There is no loss to those that choose to pass on you narrow understanding of art. I watch movies, read books and listen to music - some our fellow FReepers choose not to. But I do not claim some superiority because I subject myself to the horror of what many "artist" have to say.

On and on like that. To judge art by political standards is to miss the much of the world's beauty and diversity.

It's not just "politics" as though art is being judged by whether the artist is a Republican or Democrat.

I wonder if you draw the line anywhere - you know "Dr." Kevorkian paints pictures - and maybe even Jeffrey Dahmer did. If they were talented artists, would you have one of their paintings?