In a message dated 5/28/2000 8:50:48 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> Why? What would make one qualified in this area?
> Does QueeneMUSE know Rand's definition of art? Or why she takes a stand
> against Modern Art? (I should mention, not all Objectivists and fellow
> travelers agree with Rand's stance here.)
Yes, I have read all of her work, a guy I dated for a short time had this big
thing for her. Since I am open minded, i did the reasearch. I read it all --
and with the exception of "The Fountainhead" which is a very well written
novel, I found her work most clumsy and intolerant. When I think of her I am
struck with an image of a bitter, psthologically stricken person who survived
traumatic injuries in her homeland and came here to work through her psychic
wounds by outpouring onto paper. What she promotes is largely distrust,
dislike, disdain, contempt, scorn, and loathing. For meny many things.
This is not my style of thought, I am a person who loves.
She often refured things she had no knowledge of, if it infringed on her own
whims, even to the point where she wrote contradicting tracts on the effects
of cigarettes, proclaiming the medical community wrong.
Her attitude toward art was boorish, uneducated, closed minded and
Her ideals were as square as you can get. Unhip, uncool, out of it.. very
germanic/idealistic/super-uber-stiffo. At a secular humanist meeting an old
guy called her an intellectual bimbo. When it came to modern art, she had no
talent herself, nor an art education. Yet she felt utterly qualified to
vilify with great passion, the greatest names of the day, simply because her
understandin gof it was limited. She trashed a whole genre simply because she
couldn't see the vlaue of it.
Her entire outlook was sneering, venomous, self-important and smug. If
instead of spending so much time on self absorbtion she had gone to the
trouble to educate herself on the current artscene, I'd have had more respect.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:11:46 MDT