[PREV - INTEL_ME_NOT_FOR_ME]    [TOP]

CURVED_ARROWS

                                             February 3, 2014
                                             March    7, 2014

An article by Frank Rich in the "New York Review
of Books" of Feb 20, 2014, titled "Who Was JFK?",
leads off archly discussing the sheer quantity of
recent JFK lit:
                                                   http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2014/feb/20/who-was-jfk/
  "If the yardsticks are sheer volume
  and patriotic pretense, then the
  fiftieth-anniversary commemoration of
  the Kennedy assasination can be
  called the epic cultural event.  ..."

  "Television was no less rapacious in
  ransacking the archives.  ... "

The stunningly obvious question though
is why we should regard Frank Rich as      And granting the need for
a commentator above-the-fray, or just      reviews and summaries, this
another person giving in to the same       one seems a bit late.  This
impulses?                                  stuff has been covered (and
                                           covered better) in places
The point is so obvious                    like "The Nation".
that it makes me tired.
Do you realize that this                               GAGE_THEORIES
man's criticism may be--
(dramatic pause) turned              Though the actual point of the
against himself!                     article-- ostensibly a review of
                                     Ira Stoll's "JFK, Conservative"--
    It's amazing that                is to track conservative attitudes
    anyone can be so                 toward JFK, which is mildly
    unselfconscious...               interesting at least... but the
                                     main body here seems completely
                                     divorced from intro and
                                     conclusion.  Other things could be
                                     easily spliced in there...




    I see in a "cultural" piece
    in the back of "the Nation":          "Permission to Fail"
                                          Barry Schwabsky
    The author seems to be                January 21, 2014
    standing back and criticising         (print edition, February 10, 2014)
    art schools for encouraging           http://www.thenation.com/article/178023/permission-fail
    artists to stand back and be
    critical, and the meta attack
    is so bleeding obvious why       "While most art students may
    would it need to be said?        never be asked to Method-act a
                                     fully characterized fictional
                                     artist, they are constantly being
                                     asked to divorce themselves from
                                     who they are-- and, concomitantly,
                                     because art is still broadly
                                     (though ambivalently) understood
                                     as having something to do with
                                     vision or visuality, from what
                                     they see."

                                         Perhaps one must plunge in to
                                         the art school experience, and
                                         let it wash over one, without
                                         dull, unromantic questioning.

                                                         HEROIC_ART

   IS_POT_BLACKNESS_HEREDITARY


                                  CONTRADICTIONS


--------
[NEXT - CONTRADICTIONS]