“They are all as evil as those in the pit of hell.”
You nailed it. I was shocked by what I found when investigating an individual who wrote a play consisting of lies and deception which wasn’t challenged by the secularist press. The investigation led me back to the 14th c. There’s always a “book”, “play”, “painting”, encouraged, paid and promoted by the benefactors of a selected craftsman, someone not necessarily bright but by promotion through prizes, such as, the Royal Garter or a Nobel opens many university doors thus becoming “experts” on the continuum. Money certainly influences the press, universities, reviewers, etc. Ruskin wrote his “book” on art and suddenly became one of their “experts”. He was the benefactor of the per-Raphaels – they painted what he wanted which was naked pagan women in order to promote “Do what thou wilt”. Christ was removed from art in the so-called Romantic era, we got scenic views...now we get the Cross in a bucket of urine and it’s art. No one notices as it’s done by stealth. It pisses me off that the benefactors got/get their riches via theft and killing – millions of souls dead by their hands. Agrippa, Kant, Voltaire, John Dee, Sartre, Marx, Wellhausen, Freud, Keynes, Kierkegaard, Russell, Dewy, Darwin, Blavatsky, Baileys,...Rachel Carson, etc. The principles that these thinkers, promoted by benefactors have been affecting our lives and insidiously infected minds. One had to hold onto Jesus Christ as an anchor else be swayed. Religion has and always will be the driver...not money or power...though one must have the latter first. Anyone who stood/stands against them were vilified – nothing much changes. It’s the same plan. Interbreeding, marriage as a front, culling the weeds, sexual orgies, drugs, devil worship was a norm for these people. It’s amazing how it was done led by the prince of lies and deception.
Picture this guy mocking St Francis...they’re “rakes” just having fun...they couldn’t cover for Crowley so he’s portrayed as a lone lunatic...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Dashwood
Connected to the powerful Cecil line...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vita_Sackville-West
Homosexuals have claimed Ganymedes as their patron (possibly man/boy connotation.
Attis...used in all the revolutions around that time...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrygian_cap
nopardons...I don’t define them by one of their tens of labels. I generalize by calling them all Gnostics or Luciferians, otherwise it would make my head spin in confusion, which perhaps is the intent. I was focused on Ruskin rather than the pre-Raphaels. And thanks for correcting my spelling...Blavatsky. Probably lots more on this post. :)
Wow, you have done more research than me on this subject. I actually had to quit, it was really getting so upsetting....to understand the sheer evil of these people. But then, I realized that evil has always existed and always will....it is the nature of man. I read more CS Lewis then.
Whittaker Chambers ex KGB, said it in his book Witness....There is a culture war, he said, and it is God v. man and man is winning. That was in the 1950’s.
Ayn Rand mentioned around that time also that all the Foundations and publishing houses and media were dedicated to the destruction of values in society. Just like the Weimar Republic in Germany.
I read that the Masons were tied up into this movement also and I saw the nastiest video ever on their secret ceremonies a year or so ago.....disgusting people. No morality whatsoever!!!!
Did some of those artists paint nude women? Yes, but damned few and in the scheme of things, those nude paintings were in a classical style and completely unsexual in nature.
Were there a few paintings based on "pagan" themes? Even fewer than the nudes and in the vast majority ( 98%,or thereabouts) of these every single person is wearing clothes !
The Pre-Rapaelite Brotherhood was formed in 1848, when a great revival of the KING ARTHUR legend and the flowering of chivalry was in high swing in London. An extremely large portion of this group's painting deal with that legend and chivalry motifs.
The next two grouping of thematic painting are religious works ( CHRISTIAN ! )and everyday life in England.
Yes, Ruskin championed the Pre-Raphaelites, he also went on attack against those who were trashing Turner; for which he deserves high praise indeed.
You really overgeneralized some of your propositions and could use a wee bit of help sorting out the others. FREEPmail me if you want to continue the discussion. :-)
FYI..............patronage has, until relatively recently ( by people and the church; not governments ) has been the norm. There's no real conspiracy there; though yes, bias and the patron's ideas ( especially by the catholic church ) were fully expected to be reflected in the painting, play, what have you. Those who pay the piper get to choose the sing; as it were.
The Order of the Garter is NOT doled out to nobodies such as painters or playwrite! There are only ever 24 of then and the King and the Prince of Wales; that's it. Yes, some have been politicians, but they also have to be Earls, Barons, or at the least, knights. And in the 19th century, the rules were even more strict.
Now had you concentrated more on the Bloomsbury Group ( which included quite a few painters and writers ), you would have been on firmer ground. They and the Fabians lead down the proverbial primrose path;so to speak.