This is good. I completely agree with this: "Despite the hubris on daily display, almost every kind of negative social metric is on the rise—depression, suicide, self-harm, eating disorders, violence, etc. At some level this is connected to the psychic cost of living in a tragic age which refuses to confront tragedy." Not having myths, rituals and stories abandons people to themselves and they end up in pain they can't name.
I guess if I only looked at the narrowest of definitions of "art", I would also be disgusted by what is happening. But do you realize that art exists outside of the “globalist art world”?
Have you thought to look in books or material not sanctioned by your precious elitist academic institutions? Or outside your stuffy parents' idea of art?
As well read as you seem, the idea that art is limited to these institutions set up specifically by the wealthy is just you parroting the propaganda. You aren't doing anything useful by critiquing oligarchs using art as a money laundering scheme. Of course the “globalist art world” rejects works that do not serve them, that doesn't mean that the art doesn't exist, you are just too lazy and elitist to find and help promote art that deserves to be funded. This whining serves as a catharsis to mitigate and redirect any actual changes, thereby reinforcing the “human horror, ambiguity, and difficulty”.
Well, hence "My feeling is that we are building these niches outside of existing institutions which are stymied by the imperative to maintain the status quo at all costs."
I routinely mention and promote art and culture here and in the rest of my life that operates outsides established institutions. I'm not sure what you imagine my parents think art is—weird thing to say—but I don't for a second think that art is only to be found in universities or existing institutions. That's the whole point. None of the people in the dialogue make this argument either.
Why so belittling? I'm curious about why these comments project so much negativity onto the author (and her parents (?)). What made you think she was lazy and elitist? There's are a lot of assumptions being made rather than questions being asked, and I wonder if you wouldn't mind saying why.
I need more on the need for a tragic culture. Please tell me this will be expanded.
In the meanwhile this makes a great supplement on the lack of tragic culture:
https://www.honest-broker.com/p/10-observations-on-tragedy-in-a-digital?utm_source=publication-search
This is good. I completely agree with this: "Despite the hubris on daily display, almost every kind of negative social metric is on the rise—depression, suicide, self-harm, eating disorders, violence, etc. At some level this is connected to the psychic cost of living in a tragic age which refuses to confront tragedy." Not having myths, rituals and stories abandons people to themselves and they end up in pain they can't name.
I guess if I only looked at the narrowest of definitions of "art", I would also be disgusted by what is happening. But do you realize that art exists outside of the “globalist art world”?
Have you thought to look in books or material not sanctioned by your precious elitist academic institutions? Or outside your stuffy parents' idea of art?
As well read as you seem, the idea that art is limited to these institutions set up specifically by the wealthy is just you parroting the propaganda. You aren't doing anything useful by critiquing oligarchs using art as a money laundering scheme. Of course the “globalist art world” rejects works that do not serve them, that doesn't mean that the art doesn't exist, you are just too lazy and elitist to find and help promote art that deserves to be funded. This whining serves as a catharsis to mitigate and redirect any actual changes, thereby reinforcing the “human horror, ambiguity, and difficulty”.
Try harder.
Well, hence "My feeling is that we are building these niches outside of existing institutions which are stymied by the imperative to maintain the status quo at all costs."
I routinely mention and promote art and culture here and in the rest of my life that operates outsides established institutions. I'm not sure what you imagine my parents think art is—weird thing to say—but I don't for a second think that art is only to be found in universities or existing institutions. That's the whole point. None of the people in the dialogue make this argument either.
Why so belittling? I'm curious about why these comments project so much negativity onto the author (and her parents (?)). What made you think she was lazy and elitist? There's are a lot of assumptions being made rather than questions being asked, and I wonder if you wouldn't mind saying why.