Wednesday [3 to 6]

Morning all.  Covfefe, toast and marmalade.

6.  Evets 2

https://nourishingobscurity.wordpress.com/2022/08/17/admin-page-164-for-readers/comment-page-1/#comment-3684

5.  Daily Sceptic today

https://dailysceptic.org/2022/08/16/do-masks-do-anything-to-prevent-transmission-of-influenza-or-influenza-like-viruses-clinical-trials-show-no-clear-cut-effect/

4.  Ian J

One who knows (legiron) the futility of eating bugs:

https://underdogsbiteupwards.wordpress.com/2022/08/17/chitin/

3.  DAD  presents 'Wednesday'

No sooner do I finish writing on Andy's comment at NOWP than PJW presents yet another example of effing Wokery ... pseudo art.

"Wednesday.

a) Modern "Art" - a review.

https://summit.news/2022/08/16/lets-check-in-on-modern-art/

b) FDA Knew 44% of Pregnant Women in Pfizer Trial Suffered Miscarriages

https://uncoverdc.com/2022/08/16/fda-knew-44-of-pregnant-women-in-pfizer-trial-suffered-miscarriages/

c) Let's save the planet by cutting down millions of trees.

https://twitter.com/drelidavid/status/1558833893037547520  "

All right, straight into the PJW piece and he can explain about the desecration of a piece of real art ... all that's par for the comtemporary course.

Still smarting under the assault of the Paddy Power ad, I'm watching PJW excoriate the twerp who desecrated an old work of art and as mentioned, it was all pretty par for the course until the twerp tried explaining his actions ... aaaggghhh, the deliberately artificial mincing voice!  Gay power, rainbow politics right in earhole!

I clicked out.  I'm sure PJW had some fine things to say but I wasn't putting up with, enduring that twerp the desecrator.  And by the way, there was a girl dumping that ordure near the artwork too before I clicked out, it wasn't just the rainbow warrior.  Girls are so stoopid at times.  Seriously.  So easily led.

Which leaves us with art itself.  The question was one Wilde was vitally interested in and I myself am no Marquess of Queensberry nor the one who attacked Whistler.  Art is art ... if it has aesthetic value, then fine ... even brutalism and Bauhaus have their place as statements, IMHO.  There is good art, there is bad art, even within the same genre or school.

And the blogger writing to you now has been a prankster in the past, adoring much surrealism of the 20s, even gauche art deco, even some dada.  Occasionally Miro can be looked at, almost always Magritte can be looked at appreciatively.  Certainly Escher. Banksy can be clever.

As for our tiff we had here between the piano and the harpsichord ... fine.  Even DAD's dislike of flute with strings but he's fine with harp, which is strings ... ok, I'll shut up about that. 😁

Even my use of that emoji then ... hardly art would you not say?

My reply would be that at least we're concerned about aesthetics, which to my mind is good.  We're not just wallowing in ordure, we've shirley at least stepped out of the primordal bog ... no?  Haiku arguing for Bauhaus ... ok ... why not?  At least he knows what it is and will argue a case.  

I also really like PJW getting onto the art v Wokery thing ... as aesthetics, IMHO, are vital to our wellbeing ... even a forest scene is about aesthetics, not only in vision but in sounds and smells.  The occasional shock to the senses is needed, yes ... but there's a huge difference between an occasional shock to the senses and 24/7 constant assault by the utter barbarians supposedly controlling us.  Philistines.