Please find a book which describes the changes in Western art beginning in about the 1850's or thereabout. Changes which initially "predicted" the emergence of Quantum Reality as signaled by E=MC2, and pictured the all-the-way-down-the-line cultural consequences of E=MC2
The author was both a practicing and teaching brain surgeon. He was also the author of the interesting book The Alphabet vs The Goddess which, among other things, described the all-the-way-down-the-line cultural consequences of the rise to dominance of the left-brained linear world view, which is of course also the subject of Iain McGilchrist's book The Master & His Emissary.
All potentially transformative art (especially Sacred Art) is of course a product of the right brain or the fluid/plastic dimensions of the human pysche which has been shut down by McGilchrist's benighted Emissary. Art is of course also associated with and reinforces the dominant paradigm (zeitgeist) of the times, which is of course the spirit-killing zeitgeist described by Iain mcGilchrist.
Protestantism is of course the religion of the left-brained word. Rollo May once pointed out that no truly "great" Sacred or religious visual art was produced by Protestants.
Speaking of nihilists wasnt (isnt) Donald Trump an in-your-face example of a turtles-all-the-way-down nihilist. Never mind that many deeply psychotic right-wing-religionist were more than enthusiastic about his Presidency, pretending that he was "god's" chosen vehicle to re-Christianize or bring "god" back into American culture.
And speaking Beauty how much beauty was/is on display at the various CPAC gabfests including the one in Florida where Douglas Murray gave a speak. Such gabfests are of course a full on display of the American psychosis. Check out the list of participants at the one in which Murray gave a speech - psychotics -all-the-way-down
"Protestantism is of course the religion of the left-brained word" - I'm not sure how you come to this conclusion. Given what I've been reading of McGilchrist it would be technocracy that is the religion of the left-brained world, not any religious order or denomination.
Seems we are poles apart when it comes to Douglas Murray - I really appreciated his book The War on the West - but just like art, I guess it's all in the eyes of the beholder... right?
What you speak of here is central to the spiritual war we are immersed in. It is essentially an inner war and we each see through the eyes of our own perception. Stay with what moves you - that is the guide. There will be a great deal of false art, science, philosophies seeking to deceive. Those who refuse to be deceived will go on. It is about inner strength.
Beautiful essay. This subject has been on my mind also. At the same time we have those engaging in beautiful, meaningful art of all kinds there has been a long term and vast trend toward art which reflects the hollowness of which you speak. Our culture has been under assault for a very long time. That hollowness is the result of the severe weakening of those individuals in the cultures. Art is a vital indicator for demonstrating who we think we indeed are.
Yes that is true. But are there some things that hold an 'almost' universal beauty and some things that hold an 'almost' universal emptiness? (thinking out loud here).
I think it was Gurdjieff who tried to make a case for the Sphinx and the Taj Mahal as being two examples of irreducible beauty. Archetypal beauty? I don’t buy it. Taste has a lot to do with it. And there’s no arguing for taste. I actually really like Pollock’s stuff and I have a huge affection for Rothko. I find his stuff deeply spiritual and moving - not beautiful mind you but deeply affecting. Whereas the Mona Lisa leaves me cold ...
I hear you. In music I loved what György Ligeti did in Atmospheres but you couldn't say it was beautiful. Similarly with Krzysztof Penderecki and some of his big orchestral works but they can move you to tears!
But these non-beautiful yet deeply moving works of art are not what O'Brien is talking about (if I'm hearing him correctly), but rather the shallow, empty pieces like "Fountain" by Marcel Duchamp in 1917 - a urinal that was supposed to arouse intellectual curiosity and interpretation. I don't find that at all on the same level as a Turner, Rembrandt, or Monet, just to pick a few.
Well that's the "beautiful" thing about art - it's so damn subjective. Furthermore art is often used as a vehicle in which to explore various concepts. John Cage's 3:33 is ridiculous as a work of art but as a philosophical statement it may have merit. Likewise with Duchamp it's an art for the mind - the work itself a mere medium to stress the point. Conceptual art. Is it wank? Sure but it exists and holds a place in the discussion that is art. What is art for that matter? It is certainly not only that that is beautiful. Art owes us nothing and expects nothing. There is no way to judge a work of art on a hierarchy unless you start imposing criteria on which to judge the art. Art then subverts these criteria and calls it out as a false dogma. In the end there is only what you like. I like art that makes me gasp. Be that from sheer beauty or terror or anything in between but again art can turn around and say Im not here to give you thrills. Its just what I like. Art can be whatever it wants and to me that's just fine.
You may see Duchamp's 'Fountain' as shallow and empty, but is still part of the conversation on the place that art has in our culture +100 years later.
Yes that is true, and the conversation above just agreed that art need not be beautiful. But what is increasingly so is 'art' that needs explaining to understand its political purpose - the toilet is just an object with a specific function, stick it in an art exhibition and then it's supposed to be art? It's a statement for sure, but is it 'art'? If so then anyone can put anything in an art exhibition as long as they attach some narrative to the object and claim it's art. I could dump a rusting beat-up car in an exhibition and claim it's representative of the corrupted old world of combustion engines that is fading away. It would be a travesty then if I were then elevated to the level of a Monet for such 'art'.
I wonder what the previous generation thought of the early impressionists, which grew into the modernism movement.
I don't know if everyone would consider all of the works by Picasso, Rembrandt or El Greco to be beautiful, but it would be hard not to see it as 'art' of the highest level.
Do you think a solid belief in the Creator is 'inverse Dawkins'? ... you are probably right. Not sure if a middle of the road stance would improve the argument either. Nevertheless, O'Brien will be O'Brien and that's where he's coming from.
There is some modern art that I don't mind so much either - I'm not as adverse to some contemporary expressions as O'Brien. But then I'm a lot older and maybe more conditioned to such things. I was classically trained in orchestral composition as a young man and cannot, however, stand much of the avant-guard music of the 20th Century, except for film underscoring effects. Nevertheless there are some brilliantly talented composers among the modernists as well.
we all have art that is modern and just nothing but a joke. For me it's Rothko. We can all remember seeing this "art" and hearing in our minds the artist chuckle. Campbell soup cans, or Brillo boxes...I agree with the analogy to modern music. I don't really like Schoenberg and what followed but it is admirable I suppose. Same as hiphop music...But Pollack isn't a joke. Something about his stuff, even his drips, is moving and makes you feel something. I don't really know why.
I'll have to pay more attention to Pollack. My grandfather was a painter, he didn't like Pollack's work, but then my grandfather painted realistic landscapes and didn't venture into the abstract.
I am so glad you posted this essay. It reminded me of the artist/painter Margaret Stuckey. I went to look her up on Google as I have done in the past and there was nothing, nothing on her. She wrote a book about the destruction of art which I wanted to share, but had forgotten the title. She must have written it over 30 years ago now, but saw it online several years ago. She also wrote books about the "conspiracy" to destroy humanity. I bet they are purging the Internet.
In regard to art, when my husband passed Delamer Duverus asked a painter friend of mine to paint a symbolic mandala as a memorial to my husband and his service to God through Delamer Duverus. When I saw the finished product, he mailed it to us, it was beautiful! Joe, the Painter, told me it was the most fun painting he had ever done. That's what happens when you have God's hand in your work.
Consider the painting of Bill Clinton in a blue dress in Jeffery Epstein’s house. Plenty of skill in technique, composition, etc. clearly some kind of assault and mockery going on. Weaponized “Art” on some level. Consider the “Art” work “Piss Christ.” What is going on with it? I would say it is clearly a case of weaponized “Art.” Clearly also assault and mockery going on. Extremely mediocre work in concept and execution, trying to gain attention through pure shock and insult of a tradition that many people revere. Consider the group “Pussy Riot.” I think they were arrested for thrusting themselves into the context of a church and “performing” in such a way as to produce shock from the baldness and crudity of their insult to the traditions of the church they were in fact raping--“artistically” of course. Consider “ the media” who busily megaphones this sort of “content” as “news.” Well it’s Art you know. Art is important stuff, right? So important that there is such a thing as Artistic License because sometimes it is necessary for artists to be free to bring important cultural messages for the world, you see. So sometimes you have to insult a few Christians or a few Mohammedans in the process--go ahead, soak that Crucifix in a vitrine full of urine as long as you want! Totally understandable and acceptable--just make sure you never, never, never ever question the Holocaust, Ok? Not even as an exercise in Conceptual Art, OK? Because that would not be “safe and effective” if you did that, understood?
Good Essay. I assume art is sometimes created with a purpose/ goal in mind. Is this still art? Do you really mean that a certain category of art is missing?
I have believed for most of my adult life that Western civilization ended with Beethoven's 9th, and every thing that came after it, across all creative domains, was the death rattle. I appreciate Picasso, Joyce, rock and roll, etc. etc. (and some of them approach the 9th in grandeur), but they are echoes reflective of a dying civilization. The "art sickness" you note is the body turning colors.....
The question, of course. is what comes next (with the close corollary being: will we be here to see it)?
I've heard scientists (mostly physicists) talk about how, when they're formulating the mathematics that describe the universe, they look for beauty in their equations, and this is part of what motivates them.
But I don't believe I've ever heard one explain why this should be so. According to the scientific worldview, they are operating according to subjective human preferences. There cannot be any inherent reason for the universe to be beautfiul - unless you assume, before all else, that the universe must be fully comprehensible and subject to human aesthetics.
That's one hell of an assumption, and it flies in the face of the notion of a meaningless, statistically distributed existence.
Some general comments about the cultural influence of visual art.
Re Protestantism being the religion of the left-brained spirit-killing word that is precisely one of the key elements/themes of the book The Alphabet vs Goddess. Beauty of any kind, including bright colours were more or less verboten in Calvin's mini-fascist Geneva, and transgesses of the edicts prohibiting such were severey punished. The original classic Calvinist churches were cold and dour places and set essentially as court rooms. By contrast traditional Catholic churches were essentially pleasure dome palaces providing a feast of all the senses.
The number of people that take any interest in art displayed in galleries or museums is a teensy-weensy minute fraction of the general population. So too with those interested in classical music. So too with the number of people that read quality literature, especially the acknowledged classics both old and new, and the so called great books too.
All visual art of any form including realist paintings are forms of propaganda informed by and promoting the world view of the artist. Indeed all art works are essentially an auto-biographical description of the authors mind and psyche.
All forms of visual art including realist art are also forms of abstraction and representation. Such realist art is also confined to the realm of samsara - the world as perceived and then projected on to the world stage by the artist. Modern realist art has of course been deeply affected by photography (drawing with light). The use of photography is oft-times described as capturing some cherished even "eternal" moment/event. But all such cherished events are just a momentary play of light.
At another level many/most people are constantly immersed in or viewing the most potent form of visual art, namely moving pictures either at the movies or on TV or similar screens. TV is of course the most powerful and effective propaganda and brain-washing medium/instrument ever invented. Many /most people go into a semi-trance state while watching TV - and of course it is ALL propaganda.
Look at the themes of, and the characters portrayed in the most popular TV shows including the now everywhere mini-series available on the various streaming outfits. Freak-shows all the way down the line. Unfortunately for everyone the psychotic world or anti-culture portrayed on TV is the summation of the world we now all "live" in.
Thats all there is folks and it will continue even when the fat-lady gets to sing.
Not much beauty to be found there!
Millions (billions) of dreadfully sane human beings spend many hours every day immersed in that toxic cess-pool .
Even away from screen immersion many/most people in prosperous countries are constantly confronted with various forms of image-"art" via the magazines they read, especially the advertisements. And in the world out there in the streets and of course (especially) in the shopping malls we are constantly bombarded with humanly created images promoting the "good-life".
Shopping malls are of course the "cathedrals"/temples of the world-wide kingdom of mammom. They are now found all over the world. TV advertisements are of course the modern versions of the church bells calling the faithful consumers to pray (prey!) and go to the bright-shiny-light-filled temple/cathedral to pick up the latest bright-shiny-must-have item - the lustre of which only last for a few hours or perhaps days and weeks.
And of course no one is supposed to know about the humungous amount of human blood-sweat-and-tears that went into the creation of these bright shiny colorful items, and the humungous amounts of environmental devastation too
Must confess to a senior moment. Margaret Stucki (spelled last name wrong) wrote "War on Light: The Destruction of the Image of God in Man Through Modern Art."
She also wrote "Gullible's Travels". On each page was a different facet of the conspiracy to destroy humanity. We published it for her. She drew a picture and wrote copy for each page.
Please find a book which describes the changes in Western art beginning in about the 1850's or thereabout. Changes which initially "predicted" the emergence of Quantum Reality as signaled by E=MC2, and pictured the all-the-way-down-the-line cultural consequences of E=MC2
http://www.artandphysics.com
The author was both a practicing and teaching brain surgeon. He was also the author of the interesting book The Alphabet vs The Goddess which, among other things, described the all-the-way-down-the-line cultural consequences of the rise to dominance of the left-brained linear world view, which is of course also the subject of Iain McGilchrist's book The Master & His Emissary.
All potentially transformative art (especially Sacred Art) is of course a product of the right brain or the fluid/plastic dimensions of the human pysche which has been shut down by McGilchrist's benighted Emissary. Art is of course also associated with and reinforces the dominant paradigm (zeitgeist) of the times, which is of course the spirit-killing zeitgeist described by Iain mcGilchrist.
Protestantism is of course the religion of the left-brained word. Rollo May once pointed out that no truly "great" Sacred or religious visual art was produced by Protestants.
Speaking of nihilists wasnt (isnt) Donald Trump an in-your-face example of a turtles-all-the-way-down nihilist. Never mind that many deeply psychotic right-wing-religionist were more than enthusiastic about his Presidency, pretending that he was "god's" chosen vehicle to re-Christianize or bring "god" back into American culture.
And speaking Beauty how much beauty was/is on display at the various CPAC gabfests including the one in Florida where Douglas Murray gave a speak. Such gabfests are of course a full on display of the American psychosis. Check out the list of participants at the one in which Murray gave a speech - psychotics -all-the-way-down
"Protestantism is of course the religion of the left-brained word" - I'm not sure how you come to this conclusion. Given what I've been reading of McGilchrist it would be technocracy that is the religion of the left-brained world, not any religious order or denomination.
Seems we are poles apart when it comes to Douglas Murray - I really appreciated his book The War on the West - but just like art, I guess it's all in the eyes of the beholder... right?
What you speak of here is central to the spiritual war we are immersed in. It is essentially an inner war and we each see through the eyes of our own perception. Stay with what moves you - that is the guide. There will be a great deal of false art, science, philosophies seeking to deceive. Those who refuse to be deceived will go on. It is about inner strength.
Beautiful essay. This subject has been on my mind also. At the same time we have those engaging in beautiful, meaningful art of all kinds there has been a long term and vast trend toward art which reflects the hollowness of which you speak. Our culture has been under assault for a very long time. That hollowness is the result of the severe weakening of those individuals in the cultures. Art is a vital indicator for demonstrating who we think we indeed are.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Yes that is true. But are there some things that hold an 'almost' universal beauty and some things that hold an 'almost' universal emptiness? (thinking out loud here).
I think it was Gurdjieff who tried to make a case for the Sphinx and the Taj Mahal as being two examples of irreducible beauty. Archetypal beauty? I don’t buy it. Taste has a lot to do with it. And there’s no arguing for taste. I actually really like Pollock’s stuff and I have a huge affection for Rothko. I find his stuff deeply spiritual and moving - not beautiful mind you but deeply affecting. Whereas the Mona Lisa leaves me cold ...
I hear you. In music I loved what György Ligeti did in Atmospheres but you couldn't say it was beautiful. Similarly with Krzysztof Penderecki and some of his big orchestral works but they can move you to tears!
But these non-beautiful yet deeply moving works of art are not what O'Brien is talking about (if I'm hearing him correctly), but rather the shallow, empty pieces like "Fountain" by Marcel Duchamp in 1917 - a urinal that was supposed to arouse intellectual curiosity and interpretation. I don't find that at all on the same level as a Turner, Rembrandt, or Monet, just to pick a few.
Well that's the "beautiful" thing about art - it's so damn subjective. Furthermore art is often used as a vehicle in which to explore various concepts. John Cage's 3:33 is ridiculous as a work of art but as a philosophical statement it may have merit. Likewise with Duchamp it's an art for the mind - the work itself a mere medium to stress the point. Conceptual art. Is it wank? Sure but it exists and holds a place in the discussion that is art. What is art for that matter? It is certainly not only that that is beautiful. Art owes us nothing and expects nothing. There is no way to judge a work of art on a hierarchy unless you start imposing criteria on which to judge the art. Art then subverts these criteria and calls it out as a false dogma. In the end there is only what you like. I like art that makes me gasp. Be that from sheer beauty or terror or anything in between but again art can turn around and say Im not here to give you thrills. Its just what I like. Art can be whatever it wants and to me that's just fine.
Is the only goal of art to present the beautiful?
You may see Duchamp's 'Fountain' as shallow and empty, but is still part of the conversation on the place that art has in our culture +100 years later.
Yes that is true, and the conversation above just agreed that art need not be beautiful. But what is increasingly so is 'art' that needs explaining to understand its political purpose - the toilet is just an object with a specific function, stick it in an art exhibition and then it's supposed to be art? It's a statement for sure, but is it 'art'? If so then anyone can put anything in an art exhibition as long as they attach some narrative to the object and claim it's art. I could dump a rusting beat-up car in an exhibition and claim it's representative of the corrupted old world of combustion engines that is fading away. It would be a travesty then if I were then elevated to the level of a Monet for such 'art'.
I wonder what the previous generation thought of the early impressionists, which grew into the modernism movement.
I don't know if everyone would consider all of the works by Picasso, Rembrandt or El Greco to be beautiful, but it would be hard not to see it as 'art' of the highest level.
Doing an inverse Dawkins doesn’t improve the argument.
Do you think a solid belief in the Creator is 'inverse Dawkins'? ... you are probably right. Not sure if a middle of the road stance would improve the argument either. Nevertheless, O'Brien will be O'Brien and that's where he's coming from.
Pollock is a great artist. Seeing nothing there is fine. Art is a matter of opinion. But something special is there to me.
There is some modern art that I don't mind so much either - I'm not as adverse to some contemporary expressions as O'Brien. But then I'm a lot older and maybe more conditioned to such things. I was classically trained in orchestral composition as a young man and cannot, however, stand much of the avant-guard music of the 20th Century, except for film underscoring effects. Nevertheless there are some brilliantly talented composers among the modernists as well.
we all have art that is modern and just nothing but a joke. For me it's Rothko. We can all remember seeing this "art" and hearing in our minds the artist chuckle. Campbell soup cans, or Brillo boxes...I agree with the analogy to modern music. I don't really like Schoenberg and what followed but it is admirable I suppose. Same as hiphop music...But Pollack isn't a joke. Something about his stuff, even his drips, is moving and makes you feel something. I don't really know why.
I'll have to pay more attention to Pollack. My grandfather was a painter, he didn't like Pollack's work, but then my grandfather painted realistic landscapes and didn't venture into the abstract.
I am so glad you posted this essay. It reminded me of the artist/painter Margaret Stuckey. I went to look her up on Google as I have done in the past and there was nothing, nothing on her. She wrote a book about the destruction of art which I wanted to share, but had forgotten the title. She must have written it over 30 years ago now, but saw it online several years ago. She also wrote books about the "conspiracy" to destroy humanity. I bet they are purging the Internet.
In regard to art, when my husband passed Delamer Duverus asked a painter friend of mine to paint a symbolic mandala as a memorial to my husband and his service to God through Delamer Duverus. When I saw the finished product, he mailed it to us, it was beautiful! Joe, the Painter, told me it was the most fun painting he had ever done. That's what happens when you have God's hand in your work.
Christopher Alexander wrote an interesting 4-volume work “The Nature of Order” that exposes what is wrong with “modern architecture” in great detail.
Thank you so much for this. I didn’t know if him.
Consider the painting of Bill Clinton in a blue dress in Jeffery Epstein’s house. Plenty of skill in technique, composition, etc. clearly some kind of assault and mockery going on. Weaponized “Art” on some level. Consider the “Art” work “Piss Christ.” What is going on with it? I would say it is clearly a case of weaponized “Art.” Clearly also assault and mockery going on. Extremely mediocre work in concept and execution, trying to gain attention through pure shock and insult of a tradition that many people revere. Consider the group “Pussy Riot.” I think they were arrested for thrusting themselves into the context of a church and “performing” in such a way as to produce shock from the baldness and crudity of their insult to the traditions of the church they were in fact raping--“artistically” of course. Consider “ the media” who busily megaphones this sort of “content” as “news.” Well it’s Art you know. Art is important stuff, right? So important that there is such a thing as Artistic License because sometimes it is necessary for artists to be free to bring important cultural messages for the world, you see. So sometimes you have to insult a few Christians or a few Mohammedans in the process--go ahead, soak that Crucifix in a vitrine full of urine as long as you want! Totally understandable and acceptable--just make sure you never, never, never ever question the Holocaust, Ok? Not even as an exercise in Conceptual Art, OK? Because that would not be “safe and effective” if you did that, understood?
Good Essay. I assume art is sometimes created with a purpose/ goal in mind. Is this still art? Do you really mean that a certain category of art is missing?
I have believed for most of my adult life that Western civilization ended with Beethoven's 9th, and every thing that came after it, across all creative domains, was the death rattle. I appreciate Picasso, Joyce, rock and roll, etc. etc. (and some of them approach the 9th in grandeur), but they are echoes reflective of a dying civilization. The "art sickness" you note is the body turning colors.....
The question, of course. is what comes next (with the close corollary being: will we be here to see it)?
I recently watched The Sound Of Music for the first time. Blew me away. How deep we have sunk, even in popular culture!
I've heard scientists (mostly physicists) talk about how, when they're formulating the mathematics that describe the universe, they look for beauty in their equations, and this is part of what motivates them.
But I don't believe I've ever heard one explain why this should be so. According to the scientific worldview, they are operating according to subjective human preferences. There cannot be any inherent reason for the universe to be beautfiul - unless you assume, before all else, that the universe must be fully comprehensible and subject to human aesthetics.
That's one hell of an assumption, and it flies in the face of the notion of a meaningless, statistically distributed existence.
Physicists are the poets of scientific world, they can't help themselves 😇
Some general comments about the cultural influence of visual art.
Re Protestantism being the religion of the left-brained spirit-killing word that is precisely one of the key elements/themes of the book The Alphabet vs Goddess. Beauty of any kind, including bright colours were more or less verboten in Calvin's mini-fascist Geneva, and transgesses of the edicts prohibiting such were severey punished. The original classic Calvinist churches were cold and dour places and set essentially as court rooms. By contrast traditional Catholic churches were essentially pleasure dome palaces providing a feast of all the senses.
The number of people that take any interest in art displayed in galleries or museums is a teensy-weensy minute fraction of the general population. So too with those interested in classical music. So too with the number of people that read quality literature, especially the acknowledged classics both old and new, and the so called great books too.
All visual art of any form including realist paintings are forms of propaganda informed by and promoting the world view of the artist. Indeed all art works are essentially an auto-biographical description of the authors mind and psyche.
All forms of visual art including realist art are also forms of abstraction and representation. Such realist art is also confined to the realm of samsara - the world as perceived and then projected on to the world stage by the artist. Modern realist art has of course been deeply affected by photography (drawing with light). The use of photography is oft-times described as capturing some cherished even "eternal" moment/event. But all such cherished events are just a momentary play of light.
At another level many/most people are constantly immersed in or viewing the most potent form of visual art, namely moving pictures either at the movies or on TV or similar screens. TV is of course the most powerful and effective propaganda and brain-washing medium/instrument ever invented. Many /most people go into a semi-trance state while watching TV - and of course it is ALL propaganda.
Look at the themes of, and the characters portrayed in the most popular TV shows including the now everywhere mini-series available on the various streaming outfits. Freak-shows all the way down the line. Unfortunately for everyone the psychotic world or anti-culture portrayed on TV is the summation of the world we now all "live" in.
Thats all there is folks and it will continue even when the fat-lady gets to sing.
Not much beauty to be found there!
Millions (billions) of dreadfully sane human beings spend many hours every day immersed in that toxic cess-pool .
Even away from screen immersion many/most people in prosperous countries are constantly confronted with various forms of image-"art" via the magazines they read, especially the advertisements. And in the world out there in the streets and of course (especially) in the shopping malls we are constantly bombarded with humanly created images promoting the "good-life".
Shopping malls are of course the "cathedrals"/temples of the world-wide kingdom of mammom. They are now found all over the world. TV advertisements are of course the modern versions of the church bells calling the faithful consumers to pray (prey!) and go to the bright-shiny-light-filled temple/cathedral to pick up the latest bright-shiny-must-have item - the lustre of which only last for a few hours or perhaps days and weeks.
And of course no one is supposed to know about the humungous amount of human blood-sweat-and-tears that went into the creation of these bright shiny colorful items, and the humungous amounts of environmental devastation too
💬 Some general comments about the cultural influence of visual art.
...Proudly presented to y’all by sharply analysing & categorising dispassionate left brain 😏
Must confess to a senior moment. Margaret Stucki (spelled last name wrong) wrote "War on Light: The Destruction of the Image of God in Man Through Modern Art."
She also wrote "Gullible's Travels". On each page was a different facet of the conspiracy to destroy humanity. We published it for her. She drew a picture and wrote copy for each page.
Entarte Kunst