Look and See: The Rape of the Masters

BreakPoint with Charles Colson | September 30, 2004 | Charles Colson

[Mr. Silverback]

It turns out that a famous portrait of four little girls is really a representation of sexism, slavery, and oppression in general. A religious and deeply moral artist was secretly obsessed with cross-dressing and conflicted about his own gender, as you can tell just by looking at his work. And a simple painting of a man in a boat, surrounded by sharks, is filled with symbols of everything from racism to misogyny to castration.*

If any of these statements sound familiar to you, you have probably been reading contemporary art criticism. That’s what Roger Kimball, himself an art critic, explains in his new book, The Rape of the Masters: How Political Correctness Sabotages Art.

Kimball writes that many of his fellow critics “do an enormous amount of damage by institutionalizing both an attack on art and [a negative] attitude toward cultural achievement. The attack proceeds partly by displacing art with politics of one stripe or another, partly by diffusing an atmosphere of smug trashiness. The attitude towards cultural achievement is one of barely concealed hostility.” With such an attitude permeating the art world, it’s no wonder so many people have decided that art just isn’t relevant to their lives.

By contrast, in his readable and highly enjoyable book, Kimball skewers the critics’ approach. He dryly notes at the beginning, “As I was writing this book, I passed around draft chapters . . . to various friends. The question I was asked most often was ‘Are you making this up?’”

Sad to say, he wasn’t. For instance, as Kimball recounts, Professor Michael Fried of Johns Hopkins University really did look at a hunting scene, painted by Gustave Courbet, and see a dramatization of “the Freudian notion of castration.”**

“What is it about castration and art critics, anyway?” asks an exasperated Kimball.

But Kimball goes on to examine the reasons behind these ludicrous misinterpretations, and what he finds is a desperate need to interpret everything through personal ideology. He quotes art historian Keith Moxey of Barnard College and Columbia University, who said, “Historical arguments will be evaluated according to how well they coincide with our political convictions and cultural attitudes.” Well.

What is the connection between art and politics? Kimball speculates that critics and professors like Moxey are searching for significance. He writes, “The pleasures afforded by purely aesthetic experience are essentially thirsty pleasures, which by their very nature crave satisfaction in another, less worldly realm.” So these people try to find deeper meanings in everything they see; deeper meanings that just happen to fit with the way they view the world: politically.

Kimball implores his readers to take a distinctly different approach to art: Simply “look and see.”

There is great significance in art, but it can’t be found by twisting artistic works to fit political ideologies. Art communicates the worldview of the artist, how he or she understands reality. Great art will communicate reality as it is: both the reality of God’s love and the beauty of His creation—and the ways in which we’ve sometimes desecrated that creation. Art teaches truths we cannot comprehend if we’re too busy theorizing about cross-dressing and misogyny.

[Mr. Silverback]

* These descriptions refer to...

"The Daughters of Edward Darley Boit" (1882) by John Singer Sargent ("It turns out that a famous portrait of four little girls is really a representation of sexism, slavery, and oppression in general.")

"Drunken Silenus" (1618) by Peter Paul Rubens ("A religious and deeply moral artist was secretly obsessed with cross-dressing and conflicted about his own gender, as you can tell just by looking at his work.")

"The Gulf Stream" (1899) by Winslow Homer. ("And a simple painting of a man in a boat, surrounded by sharks, is filled with symbols of everything from racism to misogyny to castration.")

** This refers to...

"The Quarry" (1856) by Jean Désirée Gustav Courbet ("...Professor Michael Fried of Johns Hopkins University really did look at a hunting scene, painted by Gustave Courbet, and see a dramatization of “the Freudian notion of castration.")

[Mr. Silverback]

BreakPoint/Chuck Colson Ping!

If anyone wants on or off my BreakPoint Ping List, please notify me here or by freepmail.

[Mr. Silverback]

Personal Prerogative Ping!

The caption-A-Rama will be up this afternnoon. In the meantime, here's an appetizer: Check out this column, the leftists' descriptions of these paintings are a hoot and a half! If you want on or off the weekly Useful Idiot Caption-A-Rama Ping List, please notify me by freepmail.

[Flashman_at_the_charge]

As Freud said, "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar", unless of course it features in a Clinton deposition.

[theFIRMbss]

>There is great significance in art, but it can’t be found by twisting artistic works to fit political ideologies

I read this book, and
I found it pretty boring.
The PC theories

are usually
from fringe journals no one reads
except fringe people.

I think publishers
are just trying to cash in
on conservatives.

[steve-b]

It turns out that a famous portrait of four little girls is really a representation of sexism, slavery, and oppression in general.

These idiots could find "a representation of sexism, slavery, and oppression in general" in a dial tone.

[DTogo]

Idiots who make such statements are probably frustrated that they can't even draw a stick figure or color within the lines - hence good art is a harsh reminder of being laughed at in 3rd grade art class. Same thing with Liberals and great American achievements and achievers - reminds them of their own failures and jealousy of others.

Lame.

[FourtySeven]

I hope and pray, that as I continue to feed my political addiction here and elsewhere, that I never become so consumed by it as to succumb to this! There are some things that are just not political, and never should be.

[samtheman]

I'm sure Kimball is right, that there is a great amount of "twisting artistic works to fit political ideologies" on the part of leftist professors and art critics.

At the same time, I suspect there's also a simpler motive combining with the ideological motive:

These art critics and art professors are for the most part dreary little people leading dreary little lives and they can add a bit of spark, zest and cash income to their dreary little existences by making up grotesque sexual innuendos about the people and works that they hate.

Which brings me to a third motive: why do these leftists so hate art and artists?

Because they are dreary little people leading dreary little lives and they are burning with envy at the thought of anyone, anywhere, in any place or time, that has talent, creativity and a zest for life.

As one of the characters in Dostoyevski's POSSESSED said:

"We shall stone Shakespeare and pluck Copernicus' eyes out."

Dreary little mean-spirited disgusting scum-bag leftists.

[Miss Marple]

While few in the general public read these journals, those journals are the Bible as far as art schools are concerned. My daughter graduated a year ago with a degree in fine arts (painting) and I can assure you this is the view many of her professors took.

[michigander]

I don't see how leftists could consider these examples to be "art".
Where's the dung and urine?

[macbee]

Tom Wolfe's The Painted Word skewered the idiocies of "ArtCrit" almost 30 years ago. It appears that things have not approved in the interim.

[macbee]

"approved" = "improved". I'm sure some Freudians would have a field day with that typo. 8-}

[wjcsux]

The leftist whack-jobs have totally permeated society.

[evets]

[Viet Vet in Augusta GA]

Oh, yeah, that's exactly what I see too...
Uh-huh.
Wondering where to send my little girl to college to keep her away from idiot theorists like this.

[handy]

What do they say about this one?

[johnboy]

lengthy, but very worthwhile read on the subject here.

[Palladin]

What bullshite! Just because these modern day critics are obsessed with pedophilia, homosexuality, and freakishness, they assume everyone is/was.

It's called projection.

[bikepacker67]

These idiots could find "a representation of sexism, slavery, and oppression in general" in a dial tone.

I'll give it a shot...

<Barking Moonbat>

The emergence of the dial tone - an aggressively male hegemonic construction - was a direct assault on womyn's growing financial autonomy as switchboard operators in the early 1900's

</Barking Moonbat>

Howz Dat?