Replies

Keep in mind that I never said that it was impossible for such things as the WTC to be objectively considered art. I just think in 99% of cases like these the concept of art criticism is used as a facade for expressing indefensible, immoral, and stupid points of view. In this case, I think it is plain that this goofy bastard has a deep-seated hatred of America, and thought he had the backing to say so in public. He didn't (for once), and hence this "retraction".

I think it is a big jump from saying something is a work of art to being in a position to appreciate it. I watch the "Triumph of Will" with detachment, because I cannot separate the images from what they represent. I would certainly never observe any images of the Holocaust for their artistic value...

I would certainly never observe any images of the Holocaust for their artistic value...

Not the images, although some of these have artistic value. But it is the photographer's art not the art of monsters who reduced the subjects to such a state.

The Holocaust as art has to do with the act itself. As a an expression of evil. I don't agree with this completely but it is worth considering.