Comments on: Yes, Mies van der Rohe is Antiseptic and Cold and Socialist

By: redfish

redfish — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 22:16:33 +0000

I find much less people understand Bouguereau than understand Rothko.

Bouguereau critics find little more in that painting than a bunch of pretty girls, while in fact the painting is a lot more complex than that aesthetically, and thematically.

Also, its one of Bouguereau’s less effective paintings, because the composition is too staged. But I understand why you used it, because you want the easiest foil as possible.

By: Against Happiness « Entitled to an Opinion

Against Happiness « Entitled to an Opinion — Wed, 06 Feb 2008 09:38:31 +0000

[...] variety. I don’t know what “virtue ethics” has to say about anti-natalism, but some advocates are certainly fine with killing lots of people (Larison replies on the issue here). Even those who [...]

By: Steve Burton

Steve Burton — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 21:11:10 +0000

WW: why not provide the link? Simon Schama’s Rothko bit may be seen here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXZFLf9zHjs&feature=related

Personally, I can hardly imagine a more damning attempt at a defense. Schama shows not the least sign of visual sensitivity. Which is something the French Academic painters of the 19th century all learned, as a matter of course, if they didn’t possess it naturally.

By: Will Wilkinson

Will Wilkinson — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 18:15:56 +0000

For Rothko-haters, I recommend the episode on him in Simon Schama’s Power of Art series.

By: Brian Moore

Brian Moore — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:12:36 +0000

I like Bouguereau and I don’t like National Greatness.

*sniff*

I think this only displays that it’s hard to make analogies like this. I’ll forgive everyone’s art taste if they promise to say bad things about McCain.

By: wilberforce

wilberforce — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 15:57:35 +0000

i would just like to applaud steve burton for putting WW in his place. seriously WW, did you even follow your own links? you can’t be smugly superior to the unwashed masses’ taste in art when your taste is shared by mostly nouveau riche creeps and peter gabriel: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Us_%28Peter_Gabriel_album%29.

By: TGGP

TGGP — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 07:39:45 +0000

Wow, that Rothko is utter crap. To prefer that at any time would just indicate terrible eyesight.

Why is Mitt your man? He’s wholly behind the war, he wants to double Guantanamo, he was pushing socialism/corporatism in Detroit and he’s entirely made of plastic. If you had said you were for Gravel or Kucinich I would have respected you more, and I don’t even know if they’re still in the race.

By: Ben A

Ben A — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:27:36 +0000

There is much to be said for the argument that the government has no business imposing on its citizens a commitment to “a cause greater than one’s self.” There is much less to said for the argument that a flourishing life does not require commitment to a cause greater than one’s self. I am very surprised that Will thinks invoking the second argument against national greatness conservatism is likely to cast libertarianism in a favorable light.

By: Will Wilkinson

Will Wilkinson — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 04:05:26 +0000

But you have to admit that to prefer Rothko to Bouguereau back in Bouguereau’s day would have been AWESOME.

By: Steve Burton

Steve Burton — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 03:58:54 +0000

To prefer Rothko to Bouguereau, these days, is not to display even the slightest flicker of mature judgment. It is merely to display a superficial familiarity with the conventional wisdom of recent times.

The smug self-satisfaction of WW’s second paragraph above just makes me cringe.

By: cby

cby — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 02:51:11 +0000

And, of course, the virtues required in war are not something that could possibly have any relevance for a modern president . . .

By: a Duoist

a Duoist — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 10:48:54 +0000

‘Virtue,’ Montesquieu noted, is the “glue” that holds together republics, while ‘honor’ is the glue that holds together monarchies. Bowman’s book noted that all of the Judaic/Christian cultures began a post-honor sociology as a consequence of WWI, which leaves us with only ‘virtue’ and a wistful nostalgia for ‘honor’ as the glues to hold republics together. “Honor,’ by the way, is always an important ‘glue’ for the military, as in “Duty, Honor, Country” as the motto at West Point.

M noted one other glue, however: absent ‘virtue’ or ‘honor,’ FEAR can hold a society together: he called such fear societies, “tyrannies.”

Perhaps the best way to understand Senator McCain is to think of the phrase, ‘men of honor’ whenever he mentions ‘virtue.’

By: alphie

alphie — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 07:15:45 +0000

Sounds very nice…in theory.

In reality, China’s Commies managed to grow their economy at a rate of 11.5% last year while America’s economy is actually shrinking.

People who live in glass hunting lodges…

By: Glen

Glen — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 05:02:46 +0000

I liked the old analogy better. I agree that the Bouguereau is terrible… but Rothko is better? Seriously? Allow me to play the philistine by saying that Rothko sucks. Yes, I took the requisite college art classes that were supposed to make me appreciate modern non-representational art, I even went to see the Rothko exhibit in person… and I still think it sucks. C’mon, it’s big stripes of color. Okay, okay, they’re layered and stuff. Whatever, they’re still just big colored stripes. Simultaneously pretentious and unimpressive.

By: Laure

Laure — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:21:03 +0000

Hmm, I think that comparing systems in which one is organized to art an be problematic. Perhaps it’s unfair to apply one’s personal experience in such matters (though the understanding of art seems to invite if not beg the reaction) but whereas I might describe my experience as a libertarian-leaning person as that of someone whom, as you suggest, rationally prefers to have things work in a sensible and unconstrained-as-possible manner, my experience with Rothko, for example, is an emotive, quasi-spiritual gut reaction that considers the conceptual aspects of the work as an afterthought. In all of your examples I am on your aestheic “side” and yet I don’t feel like I can buy fully into the metaphor.

Then again, I am subject to an emotional reaction when it comes to personalities- when I find someone creepy (which can occur with politicians), I am more likely to find their ideas suspect too. I don’t *think* this indicates a lack of intellectual evolution on my part- I think some emotion adds to one’s experiencing of many things, including social structure.

So maybe I like your analogy after all.