Ruphus -> RE: Signs of Neanderthals mating with humans (Mar. 7 2011 21:47:42)
|
quote:
It's a problem because then you get accused of cultural insensitivity and a tricky tedious argument follows in which you have to carefully parse out the difference between what is universally best for everyone and the environment and what is cultural preservation. Probably, by minds who strive for correctness, without being able to think things to ends. Sometimes, not even simple ones, as they can´t free themselves of what is fancied to look like correct ways of approach. Cultural idiosyncrasies are always worth conserving, given that they will not cause injustice or needless shortcomings. If they do however, they should be left behind, for culture of pragmatism, as owed to a thinking species. There are cultures and languages going lost every day now. Taking immediate measures for preserving those still to go, should be rather of sense than loopy conservation of ignorant habits. - At crying status quoe I would think it time to put an end to thoughtless PC, - thus consider myself what I´d call a "culturist". Naming ignorance and cruelty as seen, no matter which culture. Which is why I would not approve certain Swiss provence tradition of eating dog as cultural gem either; and among other things request industrial investment into protein of plants ( artificial meat, as started over thirty years ago, but discarded ) anyway, so that indifference and barbarism shall cease meanwhile over 2000 A.D. - quote:
... like a Shostakovich symphony written to please the soviet leaders, it has an element of subversion built into it that the leaders are too stupid or untrained to understand. My cousin once magnaged to get a pantomime performance through the censoring of a dictature. At the time when the regime realized what it meant, the video was shown on TV, and him situated abroad already. quote:
You can look at it in many ways, but I apply the classic, thesis blended with antithesis equals synthesis model to it because it gives a contrast to Rapins work and as a visual sign that wants to spell out a specific meaning for the viewer and often a closed meaning. One of the main differences between the way art communicates today as opposed to yesterday is that inventing a situation where the viewer becomes a greater a participant in the creation of the meaning is has become more important. I can´t find concrete problems with conveyance of specific meanings ( especially not under global destruction as is, that could use each any pointer available; be it explicitely or subtley. - Despite freakishly opposing common sense of past decades, which hopefully keeps fading to insignificance. People should be emancipated enough these days to not be dominated by inferioirity complex of intellectual servility anymore. In fact, an autonomous beholder will be self-confidently ready for focussing on contents, regardless ways of formality ). Which won´t mean that subtle conveyance couldn´t be very enjoyable in the same time. - Now, with Repin there seems to have been conveyed litlle of expanded, lesser even of revolutionary contents. The less as he seems to have been bourgeois. Yet, to me it would appear like gross dismissing if works like his were to be mainly eyed under aspects of extended messages. Quoting myself on the painting below: quote:
Look at how lively the situation tells of what is happening. And imagine that as a painter you could never have models deliver you such a moody example to even take from. See how this was generated from an inner projection sharp like a mirror. Look at all the individual interactions, the different measure of engagement down to those figures wo just approach the scene, and to what is not involved at all. Look at how he dressed them, at the mimics, gestures, the sarcasm ... the torn glum of the sultan´s messanger ... Try sensing what an inner eye it takes to envision such sparkling host of detail and even be able to convey all of that to canvas. And how! ... You probably guessed it already; just love watching exceptional skills. Ruphus quote:
Background to the paintings motive: The text of the Sultan's letter to the Cossacks: As the Sultan; son of Muhammad; brother of the Sun and Moon; grandson and viceroy of God; ruler of the kingdoms of Macedonia, Babylon, Jerusalem, Upper and Lower Egypt; emperor of emperors; sovereign of sovereigns; extraordinary knight, never defeated; steadfast guardian of the tomb of Jesus Christ; trustee chosen by God himself; the hope and comfort of Muslims; confounder and great defender of Christians—I command you, the Zaporozhian Cossacks, to submit to me voluntarily and without any resistance, and to desist from troubling me with your attacks. —Turkish Sultan Mehmed IV The reply was a stream of invective and vulgar rhymes, parodying the Sultan's titles: "Zaporozhian Cossacks to the Turkish Sultan! Thou art a turkish imp, the damned devil's brother and friend, and a secretary to Lucifer himself. What the devil kind of knight art thou that cannot slay a hedgehog with your naked arse? The devil ****s, and your army eats. Thou a son of a bitch wilt not ever make subjects of Christian sons; we have no fear of your army, by land and by sea we will battle with thee, **** thy mother. Thou art the Babylonian scullion, Macedonian wheelwright, brewer of Jerusalem, goat-****er of Alexandria, swineherd of Greater and Lesser Egypt, Armenian pig, Podolian villain, catamite of Tartary, hangman of Kamyanets, and fool of all the world and underworld, a fool before our God, a grandson of the Serpent, and the crick in our dick. Pig's snout, mare's arse, slaughterhouse cur, unchristened brow, screw thine own mother! So the Zaporozhians declare, you lowlife. Thou wilt not even be herding Christian pigs. Now we shall conclude, for we don't know the date and don't have a calendar; the moon's in the sky, the year in the book, the day's the same over here as it is over there; for this kiss our arse!"
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
|
|
|
|