1. Forum
  2. USENET
  3. rec.arts.tv

  • "It is predominantly the Right that has created, and continues tocreate, good art."

    From Found Elsewhere@posts@everywhere.net to alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.guns,rec.arts.tv on Fri Nov 21 21:27:54 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    The Self-Negating Argument
    November 21, 2025
    https://voxday.net/2025/11/21/the-self-negating-argument/

    This made me laugh.

    Why the right can't recognize or create good art

    by Helen Roy

    First of all, I'm a Swiftie...

    The not-so-funny thing about what, for lack of a more accurate and sensible word, we shall call "the Left" is the way that they subvert, if not invert entirely, every single word that comes out of their mouth. It doesn't matter
    if it's "art" or "racism" or "evidence" or "equality" or "justice" or "violence", every single word used by them means something very different,
    if not entirely opposite to, the word as it is commonly understood and
    defined in the dictionary.

    In fact, it is predominantly the Right that has created, and continues to create, good art. All the little left-wing fantasy authors are imitating Tolkien, not Michael Moorcock. The giants of art, music, and literature are
    so unabashedly white, European, and male to such an extent it was necessary
    to invent a whole series of fake awards to permit the Left to pretend that
    what passed for their art was even art at all, let alone good.

    The thing that the Left, such as it is, will never understand is that
    quality is never conveyed by an awards jury, a publishing gatekeeper, or
    even the ability to purchase bots. Quality in the arts is inherent, and no amount of relying upon various mouthpieces to declare its existence can
    create it when it isn't there.
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From The Horny Goat@lcraver@home.ca to rec.arts.tv on Sun Nov 30 11:18:17 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 21:27:54 -0500, Found Elsewhere
    <posts@everywhere.net> wrote:

    In fact, it is predominantly the Right that has created, and continues to >create, good art. All the little left-wing fantasy authors are imitating >Tolkien, not Michael Moorcock. The giants of art, music, and literature are >so unabashedly white, European, and male to such an extent it was necessary >to invent a whole series of fake awards to permit the Left to pretend that >what passed for their art was even art at all, let alone good.

    So do you give the credit to the Pope or to Michelangelo for the
    Sistine chapel and do you consider either of these 'left' or 'right'
    (I'm not convinced these are relevant to the present day terms for
    left and right since perspectives change over 400-500 years. One could
    make the same argument concerning the Greeks and Romans)
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Adam H. Kerman@ahk@chinet.com to rec.arts.tv on Sun Nov 30 20:27:59 2025
    From Newsgroup: rec.arts.tv

    The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
    Fri, 21 Nov 2025 21:27:54 -0500, Found Elsewhere <posts@everywhere.net>:

    In fact, it is predominantly the Right that has created, and continues to >>create, good art. All the little left-wing fantasy authors are imitating >>Tolkien, not Michael Moorcock. The giants of art, music, and literature are >>so unabashedly white, European, and male to such an extent it was necessary >>to invent a whole series of fake awards to permit the Left to pretend that >>what passed for their art was even art at all, let alone good.

    So do you give the credit to the Pope or to Michelangelo for the
    Sistine chapel and do you consider either of these 'left' or 'right'
    (I'm not convinced these are relevant to the present day terms for
    left and right since perspectives change over 400-500 years. One could
    make the same argument concerning the Greeks and Romans)

    He forgot "heterosexual" and "cis-gendered male" and "top 1%". Doesn't
    every art historian with modern sensibilities declare every important historical artist to be gay, or that females depicted in statues are
    just bodies of nude male youths with breasts added? It may not have been practical -- or legal -- for a female youth to pose.

    Also, we damn well know that artwork commissioned and displayed (if not
    built into) the Vatican itself has been censored by later Popes offended
    by the depiction of the human body.

    Nothing lends itself readily to modern re-interpretation without forcing
    facts to change to suit the very neat explanation.

    It's amazing that in Europe, in which those posing for art were not only Europeans but in the same village as the artist (shockingly, also
    European), and that those patrons commissioning the art were European
    came up with Euro-centric art.

    How much Christian-themed art were Africans creating centuries before
    they were converted?
    --- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2