the Vatican goes whole Whovian: presenting the public more confusion and ugliness by presenting an avant garde Nativity scene that only an art critic could love.
my first thought: The Daleks are here.
or maybe just the Lego version of the Nativity. But of course, in the Lego version, unlike the Vatican's version, you actually can identify who is Mary and Joseph.
but it's actually bad "art" from an Italian avant garde artist from the 1970s. Which means the "experts" have to explain it to you.
heck, it's so bad that the Vatican Tour Guides dislike it.
In another tweet, Butorac described the whole nativity scene as looking like “some car parts, kid toys, and an astronaut.”
And don't give me that "but it's multicultural" shit: it's not.
the problem is that often the "modern multicultural" artists of all countries tend to imitate bad (i.e. ugly) western art. For example, check how many of these Christmas paintings are copies of avant garde sytle, not traditional styles, and of course are ugly, and note the dates are modern.
for example, no Filipino in his right mind would consider this as representing our culture:
like much of modern art, it is ugly... and has nothing to do with local culture, of course. But it will get the artist praised by the avant garde in Manila who are influenced by the American art elites.
The best explanation of the degenerate fashion of modern art comes from this BBC video by philosopher Roger Scruton: Why beauty matters.
,,True he does defend traditional Catholic beliefs: as SandroMagister points out, when he writes against abortion, his words are ignored. Yup. But even Magister notes that when the press trumpets his "compassion" toward gay marriage as a hint the church will change the Bible to approve of such things, the Pope is spreading confusion under the excuse of niceness.
No comments:
Post a Comment