Degenerate Moderns????
DCGuerra
(repost from tnn. catholic. religion
From: tara...@aol.com
wrote:
:Degenerate Moderns
- Modernity as Rationalized Sexual Misbehavior
:by E. Michael Jones ISBN 0-89870-447-2
<snip>
>Like the confessions of St. Augustine, this book dragged
>me through past times of my life and illuminated for me
>my own rationalized sexual misconduct previous to entering
>the Church.
Glad you've given up the "wild oats" for responsible behavior.
Now I understand your passion for the Church as behavior modifier.
If it helps you lead a clean life, wonderful!
>From Ralph McInerny (Univ of Notre Dame):
Who is he? Other than a "buzz generator" for the blurb.
>In this groundbreaking new book, Jones shows how some
>of the major determining leaders in modern thought and
>culture have rationalized their own immoral behavior and
>projected it onto a universal canvas. The main theses of this
>book is that, in the intellectual life, there are only two ultimate
>alternatives: either the thinker conforms dicer to truth or he
>conforms truth to desire.
And of what truth is McInerney speaking?
>I agree. Chapters of this book expose a variety of modernist
>errors from Margaret Mead's anthropology, Picasso's cubism,
First, we're assuming Picasso was a "leader in modern thought and
culture". For Picasso as a visual artist, I guarantee that "thought" --
modernistic
or otherwise -- had little to do with it. Try to get a famous (or highly
accomplished)
visual artist (and I've met a few) elucidating ideas in any lucid fashion,
and
one generally ends up with mush.
So as far as Pablo's inclusion in an analysis of "intellectual" life, I
posit he's odd man out. Artists are not necessarily intellectuals (my
definition of one was best put by Camus in his Cahiers, if I can recall
accurately from about age fifteen -- "An intellectual is one whose mind
watches itself.")
In fact, I prefer Goethe's criteria in appraising a work of art (which
incidentally must be done without consideration of the personal life or
peccadilloes of any artist) -- What is the artist trying to do? How well
does she do it? And, finally, is it worth doing?
But please explain how the author views Picasso's cubism as a "modernist
error".
In fact, please define "modernist error". Let me know if it's your
definition or McInerney's or Jones'.
I'd like to know what someone's loins have to do with artistic technique,
subject matter, and style.
That Picasso treated his wives, lovers, and mistresses miserably is a
matter
between him and God. Mind you, even had Picasso not been around at the
time,
Cubism was in the air, along with many other movements (like Fauvism)
that challenged the classical academic style of the time (Impressionism,
although
earlier, another... all those lovely landscapes and haystacks, tra-la).
If Picasso had never lived, Cubism would have developed nonetheless under
the brush of Georges Braque. He worked closely with Picasso, and their
work was sometimes barely distinguishable. But he certainly didn't need
Picasso.
Picasso, more than anything, was brilliant when it came to generating an
almighty dollar.
(Notice, too, that the kind of work he produced was anathema to such as
the Nazis, who preferred nice pretty representational painting of a folk
or heroic nature.)
Although Picasso is not my favorite modern artist (I prefer Chagall, but
did find delightful the exhibits of the former's ceramics in the Picasso
Museum at Antibes), it is impossible to ignore his major contribution to
art history. Also, he stance with regard to Fascist Spain, and the
creation of his great anti-war painting _Guernica_ -- a protest against
saturation bombing -- are laudable.
<snip>
>- and another chapter on the
>homosexual as a subversive.
Jones' book seems nasty. Obviously he's an ax to grind.
Or a gay to bash.
>This is an important book to help understand what conforming
>truth to desire does to the soul.
Truth is truth. It cannot be made to conform to mere desire.
Blonde hetero chick in the red/tan Miata
>Penitents will love it. Impenitents will hate it.
>Tarasius
DCGuerra
Subject: Re: Degenerate Moderns
From: tara...@aol.com
>In article <19970329162...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
>dcgu...@aol.com (DCGuerra) writes:
>
>>tara...@aol.com
>>wrote:
>>:Degenerate Moderns
> - Modernity as Rationalized Sexual Misbehavior
>>:by E. Michael Jones ISBN 0-89870-447-2
><snip>
>Just a minute here. Stop. Weren't you leaving?
Your brilliant assessment of this book caught my eye.:)
>>From: dcgu...@aol.com (DCGuerra)
>Date: 4 Mar 1997 22:22:23 GMT
>
>>A parting thought for both you "boys" --
Clever girl you are, to save the "bill". :)
>Also, didn't you talk to a Jesuit about being
>in this newsgroup? What did he say?
That it probably was not deepening my faith. However, I must say that
joepelt response to BAM, and Bill's overall contribution show them to be
"men" of character and virtue. Worth observing and imitating. Good for
anyone's faith. I'm sure you'll concur.
Besides, this ng is like one big "disfunctional" catholic family, with all
the arguing and dissent. One keeps getting pulled back into it.
But let me give you due credit for presenting at least one post that
interested me in terms of aesthetics. In fact, I duplicated my response
to
the alt. religion roman-catholic group to open up the discussion. Hope
you
can join us.
But remember, I'd like an answer to the questions I asked in my post on
this
subject of Jones' book.
1)To which "truth" does McInerney, and then Jones refer?
2)What does this "truth" have to do with Picasso's overactive genitals?
3)What is your criteria for judging art? Would you agree with the
Goethian
criteria I cited?
>And then on the 20th I said to you-
Oooh, you even have dates on hand. :) I'm flattered. I am.
>>>We've enjoyed having you, please come back
>>>when you can not stay for so long.
You know, I don't believe you would mean such an unkind remark. You're
more
virtuous than I, because if I said this, I would mean it. At least in the
angry moment.
>And your reply was-
>I did. And I won’t.
>>Thank you for the charitable *push out*. I know
>>hemorrhoids can be most painful when bodily functions occur.
A little self-mockery in the face of too much self-importance. Would
that
we all could try it.
>I was happy letting you have the last word here. Although I think
>the scatological reference to yourself was not called for.
How "Christian" of you. :)
>But you keep returning.
How could I resist your brilliant insight into that book on degenerates?
One
would have to be dense as fudge not to see a wonderful opportunity for
shared
discourse.
>>From: dcgu...@aol.com (DCGuerra)
>Date: 25 Mar 1997 21:00:11 GMT
>
>>padr...@aol.com
>>
>>Firstly, Tarasius is female.
>
>From where does Tarasius hold her college degree (if any)?
You still haven't told me. I'm assuming you're not an Art Historian (at
the
most) and have not taken an Art History course in college(at the least).
Then again, maybe you have.
To quote george tirebiter, our renowned Professor:
:You are demonstrating one of the cardinal symptoms of the catholic
disease:
:"I assume." It is a good idea to examine your assumptions and see if they
:hold up to reality. Sadly, that is a skill that is quite atrophied in
catholicism.
Mea culpa, for assuming about you, tarasius.
>
>>That puts quite a different complexion on our entire exchange.
>The complexion that has changed is yours, through this
>unveiling of your preference for sexist pedantry.
I keep my complexion soft with alpha-hydroxy.
>Turnabout is fair play. You once told someone "go, boy".....
I'd rather he came.
>Scat!, little girl, scat!!
He says it all the time. Only wanting me to come!
(BAM, are you with us here?)
>Luther thought us dung. Luther was wrong.
Nonsense. Who's us.
>You are a child of God.
Then treat me like one.
>It is hoped that you have learned a lesson here about yourself.
We learn many fascinating lessons. I'd like to know which paintings of
Picasso you are familiar with, and which you like or don't. Who are your
favorite artists (which works), etc. I suggest Abrams and Helen Gardner's
standard tomes on art history. Have a look-see and let me know.
>With Love,
>Tarasius
Don't tell me. Show me. Check out those books. I'm serious.