Camille Paglia | posted by MD
Interviewed on a whole host of current issues by Salon.com, here are some clips of Paglia's relevent to artistry (which of course is her primary area of expertise):
As a longtime fan of talk radio, I'm very worried about the low opinion that conservative hosts and callers have of the American artist. Art is portrayed as a scam, a rip-off and snow job pushed by snobbish elites.

I was warning about this for years in my Salon column. I was virtually alone on the pro-art side in criticizing the Brooklyn Museum's 1999 "Sensation" exhibit for its needless provocations, which I foresaw would damage support for arts funding at the local level nationwide. Now the cold reality seems to be sinking in.

...

All that's been accomplished by [the Mark Foley] scandal is to call into question one of the central erotic archetypes of gay male tradition -- the ephebic beauty of boys at their muscular peak between the ages of 16 and 18. It goes back through Western iconography from Michelangelo's nudes to Hadrian's Antinous and beyond that to Greek sculpture. It's a formula at the heart of Plato's dialogues, as in the Symposium, which shows Socrates in love with but also declining sex with the handsome young Alcibiades. In ancient Greek culture, an adult man could publicly profess his love for a young man without necessarily having sexual contact with him.

...

[R]eligion is absolutely central to this country in ways that Europe's secularized intellectuals fail to understand. I'm speaking here as an atheist who studies religion and respects it enormously. In the history of mankind, the benefits that religion has brought to society in shaping behavior and moral choice are overwhelming in comparison to the negatives, which anyone can list -- like religious wars and bigotry. Without religion, we'd have anarchy.

Religion is also a metaphysical system that honors the largeness of the universe. It's that sense of largeness, which my generation used to call cosmic consciousness, that is missing in the cynical ideologies promoted by the elite universities -- like post-structuralism, which is obsessed with politics and language and has a depressingly debased view of human experience. Post-structuralism doesn't see the stars or the enormity of nature, which for religious people symbolizes God's power.


UPDATE: Compare that last quote on religion to something similar she said in 2000:
Although I'm an atheist who believes only in great nature, I recognize the spiritual richness and grandeur of the Roman Catholicism in which I was raised. And I despise anyone who insults the sustaining values and symbol system of so many millions of people of different races around the world. An authentically avant-garde artist today would show his or her daring by treating religion sympathetically. Anti-religious sneers are a hallmark of perpetual adolescents. When will artists climb out of the postmodernist ditch and accept their high mission to address a general audience? An art of chic coteries, whether in rococo aristocratic France or in drearily ironic, nervously posturing New York, ends up in a mental mousehole.
(Emphasis mine.) Here, here. The question is, if we aren't to take religious texts literally (which I don't we are ought to), how do these nonetheless maintain insight for our lives, for our artistry, for what art we make? Or, basically: What does it mean to be an artist and treat religion sympathetically?
10/27/2006 |  Email This!  






©2006 Polysemy. All rights reserved.

Subscribe via iTunes

RSS   ATOM


POLYSEMY Home

see also...

Elegant Thorn Review
poetry & photography

The Bookshelf
artist paideia

The Daily Goose
blog by Matthew & Hannah Dallman



Have a comment?
Send an email to editor at polysemy dot org


Discussions we like:
Bloggingheads.tv
What's Your Problem?
Buddhist Geeks




To hear about
everything new
at POLYSEMY

       


©2006 POLYSEMY.
All rights reserved.