Mga app ng Google
Pangunahing menu

Post a Comment On: Steve Sailer: iSteve

"The Painted Word"

17 Comments -

1 – 17 of 17
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Greenberg's enthusiasm for the non-represenational art was probably somehow (consciously or unconsciously) a reaction to the heroic Statist/fascist (but not confined to Fascist states) art of the day. That fascistic art always glorified physical or athletic perfection and so on, which grates against the much hyped meme that Jews were not beautiful. (Whether that meme is accurate or not is another question entirely - the two hands down most beautiful women I have known in my life are both Jewish).

The Nazi campaign against Jewish and Slavic "untermenschen" was hyped around the impression that Jews and Slavs were ugly, poor, dirty, and hence contemptible and worthy of abuse and enslavement or even extermination. That is, Nazism was a supremely aesthetic political movement with little intellectual substance. Hitler's movement was "sold" by the very powerful use of imagery.

So how to react against that? Make art that is not about ideals of physical beauty, but de-values those ideals and seeks to find the "disembodied eye" (Greenberg's phrase). Make art that is anti-art.

5/3/08, 5:58 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Not surprisingly, the famous painters tended to be gentile, while the famous critics tended to be Jewish, as the different distributions of visual and verbal intelligence would predict."

Actually, no.

By this logic "the different distributions of visual and verbal intelligence" should predict that Jews are the great poets and writers, while gentiles should lag badly as they do in the field of art criticism.

The reality is that ethnically motivated Jews are targeting the niche of art criticism in society as a means of deconstructing the culture.

The position of art critic is another key choke point in the battle for control in the Jewish-led Culture War on traditional Western Civilization and Christian America.

5/3/08, 9:23 AM

Blogger whiskey_199 said...

There could also be cultural and economic barriers putting Jews and Gentiles into critic/artist boxes. It would seem that the effects would be far stronger than any distribution of spatial/verbal intelligence.

For example, painters need patrons or independent incomes to sustain them particularly early in their career when they don't make money for long stretches. This implies a strong and wealthy social network able to support an artist, in either down periods of relative unpopularity or getting started.

By contrast, it's likely that critics did many other things in a social network needing writers. Able to churn out endless copy to fill up space. A critic might also double as a reporter, food reviewer, editorial writer, and so on. This implies a widespread social network eager for lots of text. A very different kind of network than the Artists.

5/3/08, 12:07 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

know where you're coming from, but: abstract artworks = visual intelligence is tenuous at best. As for verbal intelligence, asinine post-mod gobbledy-gook is shrewd like a confidence racket, at best. YMMV

5/3/08, 12:59 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Greenberg's enthusiasm for the non-represenational art was probably somehow (consciously or unconsciously) a reaction to the heroic Statist/fascist (but not confined to Fascist states) art of the day. That fascistic art always glorified physical or athletic perfection and so on..."

Eh, but Zionist art and photography drew on a similar iconography: glorifying the tanned, athletic Zionist pioneers, etc.

"The position of art critic is another key choke point in the battle for control in the Jewish-led Culture War on traditional Western Civilization and Christian America."

Art critic = "key choke point"? Are you serious? And didn't Sailer just explain to us last week that the move from representational art to abstract art was driven by artists' fear of being supplanted by photography?

- Fred

5/4/08, 12:21 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Eh, but Zionist art and photography drew on a similar iconography: glorifying the tanned, athletic Zionist pioneers, etc."

Right, a lot of Zionism was directly inspired by European nationalist ideas, including proto-Fascist and anti-Semitic ideas. Big example: Max Nordau's ideas internalized the anti-Semitic claim that "Jews are corrupted and weak city people" and sought to create a hardened "muscular Jew" who was rooted in the land as a farmer and able to physically defend himself/herself. And succeeded.

That difference in response is why today, Jewish Israelis are very different from Jewish New Yorkers! It's the difference between Seinfeld and Zohan.

By the way, Max Nordau also wrote a major work on "Degeneration" in European society, by the way, including "degenerate art."

5/4/08, 5:12 AM

Anonymous manindarkhat said...

Not surprisingly, the famous painters tended to be gentile, while the famous critics tended to be Jewish, as the different distributions of visual and verbal intelligence would predict.

Chomsky is a good example of Jewish verbal intelligence: he can absorb and emit words at very high rates. But you don't go to him for pleasurable reading or profound insights. Spinning word-webs is the Jewish speciality, as you'd expect from their middle-man history.

5/4/08, 8:47 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Double Standard: NYT Sides with Muslims, but "Piss Christ" Foes Were Compared to Nazis

Andres Serrano’s “Piss Christ” consistied of a crucifix submerged in a tank of Serrano’s urine. Chris Ofili’s “The Holy Virgin Mary” showed the icon clotted with elephant dung and surrounded by pornographic cut-outs.

On October 2, 1999, the editors dealt with Christian offense in a single clause, before calling for art that “challenge[d] the public”:

“To be sure, many citizens of conscience find parts of the Brooklyn exhibition repugnant, and it is understandable that many Roman Catholics would find Chris Ofili's image of the Virgin Mary offensive. Others would agree with our colleague William Safire that while the Brooklyn Museum has a right to show what it likes, the administrators have been clumsy or needlessly provocative. Yet a Daily News poll shows that the majority of New Yorkers support the museum over Mayor Giuliani by a ratio of two to one. Those numbers show a broad-based support for New York's role as the nation's cultural capital. The people understand intuitively what Mr. Giuliani ignores for political gain. A museum is obliged to challenge the public as well as to placate it, or else the museum becomes a chamber of attractive ghosts, an institution completely disconnected from art in our time.”

Let's take the same sort of vile artistic license with the Star of David. And the Islamic Crescent. Let's see then if "A museum is obliged to challenge the public as well as to placate it..."

Yes, Fred, there is a Culture War.

5/4/08, 11:21 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"By this logic 'the different distributions of visual and verbal intelligence' should predict that Jews are the great poets and writers, while gentiles should lag badly as they do in the field of art criticism."


I'd say the three best American novelists of the post-war era are Cormac McCarthy, Saul Bellow and Philip Roth.


Currently we have Lethem, Foer, Chabon, etc. as well as Keith Gessen's crew of critics.


I don't think anyone familiar with literature would argue Jews aren't extremely well represented.

5/4/08, 11:23 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Right, a lot of Zionism was directly inspired by European nationalist ideas, including proto-Fascist and anti-Semitic ideas"

Proto-fascist, yes; anti-Semitic, no. There was nothing inherently anti-Semitic about fascism, and early Zionists and proto-Zionists often romanticized Arabs (they considered them "Jews with horses") as part of their own 'authentic' Semitic roots.

"That difference in response is why today, Jewish Israelis are very different from Jewish New Yorkers! It's the difference between Seinfeld and Zohan."

This may overstate the case. There has been some cross-pollination: there is a non-trivial number of Israelis living in New York and vice-versa. Also, every Jewish New Yorker isn't Seinfeld: there are Jewish cops, firefighters, etc. And every Israeli isn't a shovel- and rifle-toting pioneer anymore. Israel has its nerds too: scientists, entrepreneurs, etc. Nerds like the folks behind Syneron (which I just bought a few sharesw of stock in), and hundreds of other companies.

- Fred

5/4/08, 2:01 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

As for verbal intelligence, asinine post-mod gobbledy-gook is shrewd like a confidence racket

It's all part of the nascent cognitive age, don't you know.

5/4/08, 2:42 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Currently we have Lethem, Foer, Chabon, etc. as well as Keith Gessen's crew of critics."

Foer is a well-connected fraud (Joyce Carol Oates was his literature professor at Princeton; his brother is a well-established D.C. writer, etc.). Chabon is talented. There are some great WASP writers today too: Richard Powers, Jonathan Franzen, etc.

- Fred

5/4/08, 5:44 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

::Chomsky is a good example of Jewish verbal intelligence: he can absorb and emit words at very high rates. But you don't go to him for pleasurable reading or profound insights. Spinning word-webs is the Jewish speciality, as you'd expect from their middle-man history.::

"Middle-man" history? What a lazy tag. Sheer racist smear and the lazy caste thinking real pre-PC intellectuals were merrily blowing out of the water. Noam Chomsky's extremely intelligent, with critiquable pacifist assumptions. Antagonistic foreign policy now more than ever shown to be ultimately stupid and useless and due for totally turning into a museum-piece. Chomsky documents lunatic the violent American foreign policy that's never had a demonstrable effect on anything, perpetrated by ignorant government bureaucrat idiots. In 300 years he'll look like one of the sane guys talking: "these people are insane." He leaves a lot out, I'd like to debate him, but I respect him.

::Let's take the same sort of vile artistic license with the Star of David. And the Islamic Crescent. Let's see then if "A museum is obliged to challenge the public as well as to placate it..."::

OH! VILE! Do your little nascent growing breasts and nipply nubs and protruding clitoris hurt when you contemplate such "vile" desecration!? OH! Making the pitiful little moralistic mental organs of imbeciles twitch, scream and holler, while they helplessly mentally grope, is just hilarious and good fun.

I enjoy torturing people with the truth, out of fetishistic sadism. I love it. You can't stop me. I guess you can stop the drop of eleven-Bud-Lights piss the US government spills into the NEA, but who cares? It was a demagogue show from the start. Demagogues aim for the twitch-switches on the herd of cows, that get them unable to not moo pitifully, begging for the headache to stop.

Anyway, eff you anti-semites.

5/4/08, 8:10 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"But you don't go to him for pleasurable reading or profound insights."


You don't. But the leading scientists and philosophers in the world do. Chomsky is one of the 10 most important thinkers of the last 500 years.

5/4/08, 8:45 PM

Anonymous Martin said...

"Anonymous said...

You don't. But the leading scientists and philosophers in the world do. Chomsky is one of the 10 most important thinkers of the last 500 years."

1.) Luther
2.) Newton
3.) Smith
4.) Gibbon
5.) Madison
6.) Rousseau
7.) Marx
8.) Darwin
9.) Maxwell
10.) Einstein
11.) Schroedinger
12.) Dirac
13.) Gramsci

Chomsky doesn't even make the list. Doesn't even come close. I have heard that some linguists believe that Chomsky isn't even right when it comes to linguistics. He'll be forgotten within a few years after he dies. Like Freud - who was a quack and a crank - he'll be nothing more than an obscure footnote in obscure books.

5/4/08, 11:31 PM

Anonymous manindarkhat said...

"But you don't go to him for pleasurable reading or profound insights."

You don't. But the leading scientists and philosophers in the world do. Chomsky is one of the 10 most important thinkers of the last 500 years.


Here's Chomsky setting his titanic intellect to work on evolution and race:

You have spent a lifetime researching human
intelligence and communication, have you seen any sign
we humans are evolving a wisdom from our experience?
If so, what is it? ANNE GERAGHTY

In the literal sense, there has been no relevant
evolution since the trek from Africa. But there has
been substantial progress towards higher standards of
rights, justice and freedom - along with all too many
illustrations of how remote is the goal of a decent
society.

http://shurl.org/zPMeQ

Steve Sailer is a much more important and insightful writer than Chomsky. And writes much better prose. Chomsky is merely more influential than Sailer, at present.

5/5/08, 2:32 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Spinning word-webs is the Jewish speciality, as you'd expect from their middle-man history."

The fact that Jews are disproportionately favored in all intellectual/scientific fields as compared to white gentiles (yes, even those that require primarily logical/spatial intelligence such as math) is not due to "word webs." It's due to the simple fact that, on average, Jews are better at intellectual pursuits. Sorry buddy.

5/5/08, 8:17 PM

Comments are moderated, at whim.
You can use some HTML tags, such as <b>, <i>, <a>

Comment moderation has been enabled. All comments must be approved by the blog author.

You will be asked to sign in after submitting your comment.
OpenID LiveJournal WordPress TypePad AOL