AT-
It is no secret that art, sacred art, and beauty more generally, are under assault. New “multicultural” guidelines are dictating how art is to be constructed and rewarded. Artistic talent is shunned in favor of diversity quotas. The way to be an artist and art critic, nowadays, is to cry racism or sexism.
Theogonis of Megara divided mankind into two classes of people, the base and the noble. As he said, living through a revolutionary period in ancient Greek society during the rise of democracy, “The deckhands are in control, and the base have the upper hand over the noble.” The outlook of Theogonis is inherently conflictual and violent, not to mention truly classist.
While it is true that much of Theogonis’ poetry reflects his own concerns about Greek societal transformation, his general attitude is often attacked by critics of high culture for its supposed “whiteness,” inegalitarianism, and gendered supremacism. Such assaults on high culture fail to appreciate the real defense of high culture—the belief that all should strive for excellence, nobility, and beauty (even if not all will come to imitate and inculcate that excellence, nobility, and beauty in their own lives).
This emphasis on excellence, indeed, perfection, is what Matthew Arnold understood as the defining characteristic of high culture in “Culture and Anarchy.” Arnold even stated that the emphasis and promotion of high culture was something universal: high culture “seeks to do away with classes; to make the best that has been thought and known in the world current everywhere; to make all men live in an atmosphere of sweetness and light.” The point of high culture is to lift everyone to the good things the heavens hold.
The constant attack on high culture, however, is part of the broader rejection of tradition, hierarchy, and heritage that necessarily accompanies high culture. High culture is the product of tradition as much as it is individual genius, one cannot marvel at Michelangelo’s “David” and be so blind to its blending of classical humanist and biblical traditions some two millennia after the fact. The genius of Michelangelo, likewise, would be impossible if not for the Catholic and Platonic traditions which informed his spirit. But one need not be Catholic or Platonic to look in awe and wonder at Michelangelo’s handiwork. MORE
The problem with this article is that there seems to be two definitions that fit high culture,dude!😉 (that’s how we got Witmer)
Excellent piece MJA. Thanks for the link.
Larry Arnn and Hillsdale College sum these concepts up with the asking “What is true, good and beautiful?” and comparing those things with other things.
Jesus tells the parable of the Good Shepherd in John Ch. 10, “The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I have come that they may have life, and have it to the full.”
Because we are fighting a spiritual war with the principalities of evil on the Left, it only makes sense that they embody everything that is inverse to Godly beauty, truth and goodness.
And the longer they go on, the more the Lefts’ outsides match their insides.
@Abigail Adams – when we went to visit Hillsdale on our trip in late July, we were all thrilled to see these wonderful sculptural pieces in the quad. From Reagan, to Thatcher, to Washington, F Douglas, Jefferson and Lincoln.
As a matter of fact I met a gent there and he said they was going to be unvailing of another one…I asked WHO!?
“It’s still a secret he said…”.
What, do we need to ‘defend’ here? The fact that we love well executed CLASSICAL art, AND architecture btw?
And what, we turn our noses up at Modernism??
Is THAT IT?? IOW I do not GET the pretext of the article and I did read it to find out?
I have noted there are MANY ‘conservative’ bloggers that include some type of Raphaelite painting or other period on their site. I have ALSO notice on the SAME sites?? Pics of landscapes and BEAUTIFUL ladies. :>)
Is the premise of the article stating that we are still PRUDES or still put off a Puritanical vibe from the 50’s?
Was it a MISTAKE to paint those fig leafs, over, gulp??
Yeah IT WAS, but that mostly came from the people that commissioned the art to begin with!
AND, lastly, the liberals have NO monopoly on the environment EITHER! Another ‘thing of beauty’…
Of the 45 Communist Goals that were read into the Congressional record in 1963, two were specifically directed toward this issue.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
Two more have to do with our cultural standards:
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
The communists have succeeded. We need to take it back.
https://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/watchwomanonthewall/2011/04/the-45-communist-goals-as-read-into-the-congressional-record-1963.html