Indeed, those of us who are old enough do not remember, and those who are too young do not appreciate the climate of the times. Southern segregationists despised President Kennedy for championing the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, jr., and for characterizing integration as a moral issue. A protester at the Dallas airport that day carried a sign that read, "Help Kennedy stamp out democracy!"
Someone plug the cord back into the wall socket?
I mentioned Clement Greenberg in order to provide an arch example of what I referred to as "formalist art theory"; not too many people outside of academia know who he is & so, by contextualizing "formalist art theory" with a substantial name like his, perhaps a few non-specialists might Wikipedia him & have a magical learning experience. My larger point was this: even if you're NOT a media-specific, Greenbergian-type formalist (not that anyone is these days) - even if, by contrast, you're a clever neo-neo-Dadaist iconoclastic populist - you never-the-less indirectly maintain a artificial hierarchical distinction between "art" and "culture" by having an art museum membership. Why? Because contemporary art institutions exist to sell the idea of CULTURE (the "aura of fine art") to an audience who has no need of it. The avant-garde used to legitimate it's activities within august art museums as a kind of staged protest in the heart of their enemy's camp but now it's obvious that their contemporary exemplars are merely neo-court artists. American democratic culture is free, literally and figuratively - as radically avant-garde as it gets. You're the worst kind of hypocrite if you mug these values but speculate on the possibility of your own blue chip success. Museums and galleries all over the world will attest to their success at fooling new money aspiring to "class" & those who aspire to be new money. Locally, we have events that contemporary audiences actually DO like - dance, wine, film, pop music - functioning as siren songs for desiccated cultural institutions. Of course, these sorts of distractions have always accompanied art exhibits, but never has the gilding replaced the lily as it does today! The public could care less about the art that's on the wall of their dance & wine & pop song event. & are they wrong? No! Do you really think that Mad Men & Breaking Bad have effected the western world less than Mark Rothko or Andy Goldsworthy? Whether or not you like either of these artists, can you deny the fact that they mean almost nothing to non-art specialists?
I had to re-read your comment several times to make sure I was not in an art history nightmare.
Greenberg has been dead for years, and yes, his opinion drags on in some art-speak but I don't think most people ever think about embracing "media-specific formalist art theory", whether they belong to a museum or not.
I'm also not sure that Mad Men & Breaking Bad have impacted the western world more than Rothko or Goldsworthy. "An open embrace of that media would compromise the legitimacy of "fine art" institutions". Which media? Television? Advertising art? Sculpture? Photography? I'm confused.
Define fine art. Is it truly your opinion that "No "fine art", avant-garde or otherwise, holds any relevance to contemporary audiences"? This is a statement which might be uttered in an "academic" discussion of fine art, but it's so broad that it must seem incomprehensible to most people.
What is the "aura of fine art" and what specifically is , "snake oil" vis a vis the arts or what you have designated as "fine art"? What one likes or dislikes about a specific work or body of works boils down to personal taste. An institution's choice to show specific works doesn't address the taste of an individual viewer.
The shoes you are selling simply don't fit all feet. Museums and galleries all over the world will attest to it.
Whether or not you embrace media-specific formalist art theory (like that of Clement Greenberg), you never-the-less tacitly support the existence of a qualitative distinction between "fine art" and "entertainment" in the form of a museum membership. Mad Men & Breaking Bad have effected the western world to a far greater extent than Mark Rothko or Andy Goldsworthy. & yet we know that an open embrace of this media would compromise the legitimacy of "fine art" institutions - it would point out their lack of contemporary relevance & necessity. Thus, the current invidious distinctions between "art" and "culture" that inevitably effect contemporary art institutions in the form of audience indifference & institutional failure. Dada-type (anti)art strategies & their legacy haven't repaired the divide between art & audience but have only instituted a new divide. Look a the GOCA show downtown. Would your dad, COULD your dad make sense of any of it? What if it was a show of Rembrandt paintings? No "fine art", avant-garde or otherwise, holds any relevance to contemporary audiences. Museums are forced to sell the aura of "fine art" in order to exist & perpetuate themselves. How much longer can they successfully dish this snake oil?
Great read, Ralph!
As much as I'd prefer Dr. Rosebush leave USAFA immediately, I don't think he should be fired only on the basis of his resume and published opinions. Especially since these were known to those who hired him.
OTOH, when is his contract up? I think most civilians at USAFA, at least civilian faculty, are on 5 year contracts with no guarantee of renewal. I hope his isn't.
From Wikipedia: "Farro is a food product composed of the grains of certain wheat species in whole form ... sold dried ... prepared by cooking in water until soft, but still crunchy ... may be eaten plain .... often used ... in dishes such as salads and soups. It is sometimes ground into flour and used to make pasta or bread.
Anyone who's read the book "Wheat Belly" will know today's wheat bears no resemblance to the wheat of the Paleo era. Wheat has been modified extensively over the past 8000 years, especially in this era of dwarf wheat that is the world's predominant supply.
Paleo may be sincere about local, organic, etc, but it's mostly a feel-good gimmick.
So David, your view is alright...but anyone who disagrees with you should be fired. Liberal tolerance defined
Fire him and anyone else at the academy who is involved in the local cults. Seriously, if it were discovered that senior personnel at the academy were all members of a local mosque would anyone oppose cleaning house? It's not about religious freedom, it's about having core beliefs which are incompatible with government service in a nondiscriminatory environment.
Since we can't force Focus On The Family to move, then maybe we need to move the Air Force Academy out of their reach.
Farro is wheat.
I would have thought having good character to be part of the screening process for admission to the academy...that only those whose upbringing has developed within them a strong sense of right and wrong, who have natural leadership abilities, whose parents did the sort of developmental work that is ingrained more than learned, would all be requirements for young people in whom we would invest so much money, count on to lead troops in combat, and receive a first education at our expense.
And yet we have the faculty screening process coming under review to assure political correctness...and sensitivity.
How are these cadets with over indulged sensitivities ever going to face the harsh reality of a world that could care less about how they feel, and only wants to kill them?
The question is "what is the good reason for him being there?"
There appears to be no good reason to require each cadet to have individual, confidential contact with this man, and to give him influence over their evaluation and careers.
Given this man's investment of his life's work into homoeroticism, and pathologizing it, on the face of it this is an arrangement that invites him to be a sexual predator on hundreds--no, thousands--of young men.
Live it up.
Going ''slow and cautious'' is code for picking friends for a little quid pro quo...period. Those with the say-so will be bought and paid for by the in-crowd. Isn't it also time to talk about how high the prices can be jacked up?
Rich, you write humor but your family pieces are the best. Thanks for sharing...your dad sets a high standard.
We voted on it November 5th...
You are local, there needs to be an investigation into the possible collusion and fraud that may be occurring at the USAF Academy via its hiring practices. We know that many fundamentalist churches and organization like Focus on the Family promote and support a process of tithing 10% of your income to the church. Is there a direct correlation at the Academy of Officials hiring people who attend the churches they are member of, or fellow supporters of organizations like Focus on the Family that would receive a direct financial gain if they were given preference for employment over other candidates? Clearly the doubling down by the USAF Academy Leadership in this case, including their pubic distortion of the truth, otherwise knows as lies, concerning the recent meeting with Gay and Lesbian Cadets is the tip of a coverup. What are they covering up and why? One suggestion is that the USAF Academy has been using Federal Funds to enrich local churches and organization via its hiring practices that have given preference to a religious minority. Just a possibility, perhaps you can dig deeper and clarify. Thanks
I am not sure whether or not the Academy is a "safe and validating place to be LGBQ" was ever the issue here. The issue was the hiring of a staff member as Chief of Coaching Development when his background focus was the clear attempt to convert gays with conversion therapy (something that has been discredited). On top of that he was hired out of Focus on the Family, a right-wing religious organization that repeatedly has condemned gays based upon their religious beliefs. If Mr. Rosebush has never attempted to force his religious beliefs upon cadets and is impartial regarding his dealings with staff and cadets then there is no problem. If however, he is using this as a bully pulpit for Focus on the Family, and it is well known, I think any logical person would object.
All content © Copyright 2013, The Colorado Springs Independent
Website powered by Foundation