Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Cult of Ugliness in America
American TFP ^ | 2007 | Rev. Anthony J. Brankin

Posted on 02/19/2008 6:10:07 PM PST by Pyro7480

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last
To: Pyro7480
Why am I not surprised by your post? And by the way, your Scripture is about people, not architecture. God apparently cared enough about art to direct the specification of the Ark.

Nice try but the Ark of the Covenant is not about art...

You will turn on your car radio only to hear of some new school shooting, and you won’t even be sure if this is the eighth or ninth such massacre in as many months. You will, however, be able to form a mental image of the alleged perpetrators, for you have seen the look and the fashions on your own block and maybe even within your own families: the chopped, colored hair, the mutilations, the tattoos, the rings in the nostrils and eyebrows, the baggy clothes, the backward baseball caps, the surly looks and the sullen grunts. You’ve even heard their music — God have mercy on us; we’ve all heard their music.

Not about people eh??? If they don't fit your perception of a 'beautiful people', they will kill you and your family...Evil uglies...

41 posted on 02/20/2008 7:07:46 AM PST by Iscool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

Yes indeed. Nothing here for me to get in a tizzy about.


42 posted on 02/20/2008 7:10:55 AM PST by Tax-chick (If there's a bustle in your hedgerow, don't shoot! It might be a lemur!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

Yes, I agree. And I do intend to build a model some day! I enjoy modelbuildng. Now, one must remember that it was considered an abomination when it was first built. It was panned an ugly expression of the modern industrial aesthetic.


43 posted on 02/20/2008 7:17:37 AM PST by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
I am not defending modern art at the expense of realism; what I would like ot point out is that "things as they are" is not a straightforward concept. Turner, for example, painted light and air; I am sure his contemporaries objected to that fact that there are no discernible human figures or architectural detail in his painting. It is not unlike that in Picasso's Guernica, above: there is a picture of violence and suffering that would not be as effective with greater anatomical realism.



The Burning of the Houses of Lords and Commons

J. M. W. Turner

1835
Oil on canvas
Philadelphia Museum of Art

44 posted on 02/20/2008 7:33:51 AM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard

“Your post assumes facts not in evidence.”

Not all all.

Save for a few leftover fans of Adam Ant, no men are wearing powdered wigs, kickers with silk stocking, greatcoats and tricorne hats these days. Many do, however, live in homes decorated with bombay chests, wainscoting, and crown moulding right out of Monticello, if not Versailles. And how many ladies wear petticoats, hoop skirts, and bloomers anymore?

Now, I ask you, if you go to your local car dealer, just how many new vehicles, other than a few trucks, have floor boards or suicide doors? Pontoon fenders and exposed exhaust pipes?

Just how many MP3 players can you find at Fry’s that are as big as a small safe, with an arched cathedral style cabinet, large bakelite knobs, and vacuum tubes inside?

It is readily demonstrable that style and design in almost every other area of human technology has changed radically over the last two thousand years. Except for architecture and decor. The same styling cues and motifs have been recycled ad nauseam, and not always with the greatest of dexterity.


45 posted on 02/20/2008 7:39:36 AM PST by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: dsc
What do you disagree with? It is true that Bouguereau is underappreciated, but the feminine beauty that he depicts is but an aspect of truth. His art is a good example of sexualized beauty leading away from larger truths. Bouguereau wouldn't paint this:



The Gleaners

Jean-Francois Millet

Musee d’Orsay

46 posted on 02/20/2008 7:44:23 AM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

Yes. I picked the most striking example of truth at the expense of beauty, — there are many others.


47 posted on 02/20/2008 7:45:24 AM PST by annalex (http://www.catecheticsonline.com/CatenaAurea.php)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: annalex
Bouguereau is underappreciated, but the feminine beauty that he depicts is but an aspect of truth. His art is a good example of sexualized beauty leading away from larger truths.

Very insightful. It's true that men like to look at pretty women - especially if there's an "artistic" excuse to show the women partly or totally undressed - but it's not exactly a deep truth!

48 posted on 02/20/2008 7:56:54 AM PST by Tax-chick (If there's a bustle in your hedgerow, don't shoot! It might be a lemur!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480
Glorification of ugliness and the subsidization of it by paying customers started in earnest during the last century and continues today with ugly modern art, ugly atonal music, ugly incoherent poetry and sculpture, ugly clothing seen on the streets, ugly language now commonplace, ugly vagina theater, ugly politics, ugly metal rock, ugly drug culture, ugly suggestive dance, ugly song lyrics, ugly sex and violence scenes on TV and movie films, right down to ugly mishapen dolls for little girls.

Do the Uglybuck, do the Uglybuck
If you don't know how to do it, man, you're outta luck

Fortunately, there's enough people left with class, discriminating tastes and strength of character....and who bring up their children to chose beauty over the seductive enticements of the ugly.

Leni

49 posted on 02/20/2008 7:58:54 AM PST by MinuteGal (Mitt and Fred are Still My Guys!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #50 Removed by Moderator

Comment #51 Removed by Moderator

To: Pyro7480

Long but certainly worth the time. I’ll bet for those hearing him deliver this talk it did not seem long at all. Quite inspiring. And I loved his lovely conceit of the family forming it own little church.


52 posted on 02/20/2008 8:29:28 AM PST by Bigg Red (Position Wanted: Experienced Republican voter looking for a party that is actually conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SoCal Pubbie
How long does a car last?

How long does a set of clothes last?

How long does a house last?

If I want a set of clothes that looks roughly the same as that of a few "generations" of clothes ago, I can get that. And it's not uncommon for folks to want that. It's certainly available.

If I want a car that looks roughly the same as that of a few "generations" of cars ago, I pretty much can't get that.

If I want a house that looks roughly the same as that of a few "generations" of houses ago, I can get that. You seem surprised, or annoyed, that folks want it. Why?

If I had wanted to, I could have bough a house that was actually built in the 1700s. The market for such is very tight ... yet you're shocked (or nauseated, or whatever) that folks want to build houses which echo the actual colonial houses.

The continued popularity of Medieval, Renaissance, Baroque, Romantic, Classical, Folk, etc. music should be a clue to you.

The continued popularity of Iconography, Medieval, Renaissance, 17th & 18th Century painting should be a clue to you.

"Modern" isn't necessarily good (in fact, much of it is very bad.) Old isn't necessarily bad, and much of the "bad" has been left in the famous "ash heap of history".

Would you actually want to live in a house like "Falling Waters" ... relocated to, let's say, a 1/2 acre lot in Fairfax County, VA?

(Full Disclosure: Even in its actual location, I think Falling Waters" is incredibly ugly.

53 posted on 02/20/2008 8:31:10 AM PST by ArrogantBustard (Western Civilization is Aborting, Buggering, and Contracepting itself out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Bigg Red
And I loved his lovely conceit of the family forming it own little church

Lovely conceit?

54 posted on 02/20/2008 8:33:11 AM PST by Pyro7480 ("Jesu, Jesu, Jesu, esto mihi Jesus" -St. Ralph Sherwin's last words at Tyburn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: annalex

55 posted on 02/20/2008 8:44:02 AM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar (Only infidel blood can quench Muslim thirst-- Abdul-Jalil Nazeer al-Karouri)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: x_plus_one; Pyro7480

Have you actually read the entire piece? The ugliness that he speaks of is not just involving architecture and physical space. He uses these to lead us along an examination of spiritual ugliness. A few posters here are getting themselves caught up in peripheral issues.

As for your disdainful assessment of the work duties of priests, I have to wonder how many you know personally. A parish priest is very much involved in payroll, insurance, utility bills, personnel considerations, and all sorts of other everyday issues that many small business must contend with.

BTW, is “quototidien” the same as “quotidian”, or is it elitist of me to ask?


56 posted on 02/20/2008 8:49:43 AM PST by Bigg Red (Position Wanted: Experienced Republican voter looking for a party that is actually conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Iscool
Not about people eh??? If they don't fit your perception of a 'beautiful people', they will kill you and your family...Evil uglies...

Unless of course, your own daughter brings one home, parks his pentagram-tattooed butt on your sofa, and informs you he's about to become your son-in-law.

Then all bets are off, right dude?

Can you say "hypocrite"?

Give it up. You have a problem with anything Catholic.

For the record, it needs to be stated that the author here is not referring to those whom the world despises as ugly, or not beautiful. Those whom circumstance, genetics or accident has left bereft of what the world considers "beauty". The old, the handicapped, the deformed. That is a completely different issue.

However, it is certain that there are those who deliberately set out to make themselves repulsive to others and this is a different kettle of fish entirely. It's an "in your face" statement, a flip of the middle finger to respectable, sober people. A statement that they reject Christian values of decency. Hence the clothes with the vulgar messages, the offensive language, the studs, the occult symbols etc, etc. It is this ugliness to which the author refers. Ugliness which is calculated, contrived, orchestrated and a gesture of contempt.

But you knew that anyway, right?

You were just looking for a weapon du jour to trash something Catholic.

57 posted on 02/20/2008 8:50:59 AM PST by marshmallow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sandyeggo
Great post, Sandy. Ditto all the way.

Although I decry the rampant ugliness pressing in on us from all directions, I remain the happy optomist and enjoy beauty in all things Heaven-made and man-made.

".....TO GIVE UNTO THEM BEAUTY FOR ASHES, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness (Isaiah, lxi.3, Holy Bible).

Leni

58 posted on 02/20/2008 8:55:08 AM PST by MinuteGal (Mitt and Fred are Still My Guys!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Pyro7480

His conceit — his extended metaphor — of the family surrounding itself with beauty as a bulwark against the ugliness. He painted the picture quite well.


59 posted on 02/20/2008 8:59:07 AM PST by Bigg Red (Position Wanted: Experienced Republican voter looking for a party that is actually conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: ArrogantBustard
“How long does a car last?”

I don't understand the point of that question, or the next two. We are talking about style, not utility. Many brand new houses are built with old forms and surfaces, while except for a few “retro” designs, planes, trains, and automobiles are not. Clothing, while also recycling old ideas, generally does not try to copy antiquated technology.

I am not annoyed in the least that people want houses that look old. I myself am thinking very strongly about buying a 1950s era car. But that is specifically BECAUSE it’s old. I for one am glad that new cars don’t look like bullet nosed Studebakers.

If someone chooses to live in an old adobe, or a colonial or Victorian home, I say bravo! I can appreciate the fine design proportions and decoration inherent in a well executed structure of any era (while also recognizing their shortcomings in terms of modern technology). What I don’t understand is the emotional repulsion of modern design for many people, who cannot articulate their feelings beyond generalities that the architecture is “cold” or “ugly”.

60 posted on 02/20/2008 9:00:56 AM PST by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson