Pair of misplaced glasses mistaken for art

May 26, 2016 • 2:30 pm

The latest book I’m reading is by the New York Times‘s film critic A. O. Scott: Better Living Through Criticism: How to Think About Art, Pleasure, Beauty, and Truth. It’s a mixed bag, but, to give him credit, Scott’s taken a hard look at the value of his own profession, asking what the purpose of criticism is, whether it is itself an art form, can there be any nonsubjective standards of taste, and so on. The book does make you think, and one of its subjects is this: “does something mundane, boring, or trivial become art at the moment when it’s called art?”  We all know of all-white paintings, heaps of trash mistaken for artworks, and so on.

The latest one of these, reported by The Independent (and BuzzFeed), is amusing but also disturbing.  A 17-year-old boy named TJ Khayatan pulled a prank at the San Francisco Museum of Art, putting a pair of glasses on the floor and, in other places, a wastebasket and a baseball cap. While all of them elicited reactions from the viewers, who often saw them as art, none was as effective as the glasses. To wit:

art-glasses

grid-cell-14081-1464199492-4

Khayatan photographed the people admiring his “art” and posted them on Twi**er, where they went viral.

Question: If those glasses were put on the floor by an artist, and given a title and a fancy explanation, they would constitute an “installation” that could be worth many thousands of dollars. What, then, is the difference between this prank and the kind of “art” that doesn’t differ much from it, like all-white paintings or the work below by Christopher Wool, “Blue Fool,” that sold for over $5 million at Christie’s. 

modern_art_sold_for_bank_11

All of us could do that stencil, but none of us would earn even $50 for it. Clearly an artist with a name is more likely to produce puzzling stuff that would be regarded not just as art, but as VALUABLE art. But what about those glasses?

I am ambivalent. I can see the worth of Serrano’s “Piss Christ”, and barely see the artsiness of Warhol’s soup cans, which to me are a commentary on art rather than real art, but “Blue Fool”? It may be intended as art, but it doesn’t move me or engage my emotions. Others, no doubt, will have a fancy explanation of what it means.

I know there are many artists among the readers, so do explain to me why a pair of glasses put on a pedestal by an artist is considered “art,” but a pair of glasses on the floor is not—at least not by critics. The public, long used to puzzling artworks and unsure of their own ability to analyze things, clearly thinks that the glasses do constitute art.

h/t: Grania

DePaul President responds to the Yiannopoulos affair

May 26, 2016 • 12:45 pm

I had already written to the President of DePaul University about the suppression of free speech shown in this morning’s video, but before he responded (if he even does), I got an email from a member of the DePaul faculty, who, among other things, enclosed a letter that President, Rev. Dennis Holtschneider, sent to the University community. The faculty member, who will remain anonymous, said this:

I have forwarded the message sent by DePaul’s President Holtschneider yesterday morning. This is the latest in a line of other messages sent by him to the DePaul community, all affirming the importance of free speech at DePaul. I would appreciate if you could publish a follow-up post to allow other WEIT readers to know that the actions of a subset of DePaul’s students does not necessarily reflect the stance of the institution, its administration, or its faculty on free speech and are, in fact, in direct opposition to it.

Done. Thanks to this person for contacting me! And here’s the President’s letter, which, to my delight, affirms the value of free speech and says that the University will not tolerate further disruptions (my emphasis). Like me, he’s not down with Yiannopoulus’s message but strongly in favor if allowing it to be issued without interruption:

From: “Rev. Dennis H. Holtschneider, C.M.”
Subject: Tuesday’s speech and protest
Date: May 25, 2016 at 11:15:55 AM CDT

Dear Members of the DePaul University Community,

I am writing from France, where Fr. Udovic and I are leading a mission trip to introduce our trustees to the life and legacy of St. Vincent de Paul. Because today is a free day, a number of us are spending the day in Normandy, touring the museum, walking the famous beaches of the D-Day landings and standing silent before the rows and rows of graves honoring the men and women who gave their lives so others might live in freedom.

I tell you this because I awoke this morning to the reports and online videos of yesterday’s speech by Milo Yiannopoulos and the accompanying protest. I was sorry to see it.

Mr. Yiannopoulos and I share very few opinions. He argues that there is no wage gap for women, a difficult position to maintain in light of government data. As a gay man, he has claimed that sexual preference is entirely a choice, something few if any LGTBQ individuals would claim as their own experience. He claims that white men have fewer privileges than women or people of color, whom he believes are unfairly privileged in modern society — a statement that is immediately suspect when white men continue to occupy the vast majority of top positions in nearly every major industry.

Generally, I do not respond to speakers of Mr. Yiannopoulos’ ilk, as I believe they are more entertainers and self-serving provocateurs than the public intellectuals they purport to be. Their shtick is to shock and incite a strong emotional response they can then use to discredit the moral high ground claimed by their opponents. This is unworthy of university discourse, but not unfamiliar across American higher education. There will always be speakers who exploit the differences within our human community to their own benefit, blissfully unconcerned with the damage they leave behind.

Now that our speaker has moved on to UC Santa Barbara and UCLA, we at DePaul have some reflecting and sorting out to do. Student Affairs will be inviting the organizers of both the event and the protest — as well as any others who wish — to meet with them for this purpose. I’ve asked them to reflect on how future events should be staffed so that they proceed without interruption; how protests are to be more effectively assisted and enabled; and how the underlying differences around race, gender and orientation that were made evident in yesterday’s events can be explored in depth in the coming academic year.

As this proceeds, I wish to make a few matters crystal clear.

*   Yesterday’s speaker was invited to speak at DePaul, and those who interrupted the speech were wrong to do so. Universities welcome speakers, give their ideas a respectful hearing, and then respond with additional speech countering the ideas. I was ashamed for DePaul University when I saw a student rip the microphone from the hands of the conference moderator and wave it in the face of our speaker.

*   I was alarmed when I watched individual students on both sides intentionally provoking the others with inflammatory language, but I was proud when I saw students — many students — working to calm each other, and at times, even hold people back from hasty decisions. Many of our students understood that protests only work when people conduct themselves honorably. I wish to thank all of them for self-monitoring the crowd’s behavior. The experience could have been a far worse experience had they not done so.

*   I wish to thank our Student Affairs staff, Public Safety team, Student Center employees, Chicago police and temporary contract safety personnel. They were thrust into an unexpected and challenging situation that we must examine for hard learned lessons.  I am grateful that the situation was calmed and dispersed without serious injury to anyone’s person. I know the staff, too, are reflecting on these events and what might be learned for the future.

*   On behalf of the university, I apologize to the DePaul College Republicans. They deserved an opportunity to hear their speaker uninterrupted, and were denied it.

Here in Normandy, I expected to be moved by the generosity of those who gave their lives on the beaches early on June 6, 1944. I did not expect, however, to be shocked when I realized that most of the soldiers were the same ages as our students today. The rows on rows of white crosses in the American cemetery speak to the selflessness of the human spirit at early adulthood to lay down their lives for a better world.

I realize that many of yesterday’s protesters hold similarly noble goals for a more inclusive world for those traditionally held aside by our society. I realize also that these young soldiers died for all the freedoms enshrined in our Bill of Rights, including freedom of speech and assembly. We honor their sacrifice best if we, too, remember and honor all the rights of human freedom, even as we fight for more freedom and justice for all.

God bless you.

Rev. Dennis H.

Saudi man shoots obstetrician for helping his wife deliver her baby

May 26, 2016 • 11:00 am

Okay, pin this on Western imperialism if you can. According to Newsweek, a Saudi man shot a doctor in Riyadh for helping his wife deliver a baby:

Saudi authorities have arrested a man for shooting a male doctor who had helped his wife’s delivery, after arguing that a female doctor should have overseen the birth.

The doctor, Muhannad Al Zabn, delivered the baby in April at the King Fahad Medical City in Riyadh, Gulf News reported.

The father offered his thanks to the doctor and asked to meet him at the hospital to show him his appreciation in person for the delivery.

The pair proceeded to meet in the hospital garden to talk about the delivery when the father unveiled a firearm and shot at the doctor, seriously wounded him.

The father ran from the scene but Saudi police later arrested him. Health workers transferred Al Zabn to the hospital’s intensive care unit but he is now in a stable condition.

It’s not clear from the piece exactly what transgression the doctor committed: was it touching the women, or simply overseeing her delivery? Newsweek reports that while many people on social media take the doctor’s side, others don’t. Regardless, we see someone seriously injured because of a religious dictate separating men and women. Or was this really the fault of the West? Perhaps Robert Wright will tell us.

h/t: Russel

Milo again proves his point as DePaul students go nuts and prevent him from speaking

May 26, 2016 • 10:00 am

Let nobody say I’m a fan of Milo Yiannopoulos, an editor of the right-wing website Breitbart and a professional provocateur. He’s embarked on a “Dangerous Faggot” tour in the U.S. (he’s gay), going from college to college talking about feminism, regressive Leftism, and politics. Or rather, attempting to talk, for his mere presence on U.S. campuses apparently constitutes a macroaggression, creating not just a massive unsafe space but an Unsafe Black Hole that sucks in every Authoritarian Leftist within a five-mile radius.

As I posted before when Milo tried to speak at Rutgers University, more often than not leftist students, including enraged blacks, feminists, and Authoritarian Leftists of all stripes, try to shout him down, either getting up on stage, cat-calling, blowing whistles, holding signs, or smearing themselves with fake blood. And that is inside the auditorium. His speeches are often stopped by the shenanigans of his opponents, who cannot fathom that the proper thing to do is let him speak, counter his assertions with demonstrations outside or questions inside, to give opposing talks or write opposing articles.  And so, as this happens at place after place, Milo’s opponents make his points for him, showing their immaturity and unwillingness to tolerate ideological viewpoints they find objectionable.

This last week, another group of students scored an Own Goal at Chicago’s DePaul University. Here’s a video snipped to show when the disruptions began (after 20 minutes of his talk, at 46:20), and when one woman mounts the stage to hijack Milo’s talk (57:30). If you think the videos are taken out of context, you can watch the entire two-hour fracas by going back to the beginning.

Apparently the students think that censoring someone who questions their values, and hijacking the event, is the best way to spread those values. But it doesn’t work, and never has. All it does is show that Milo is right in one respect: many students are entitled, spoiled, and unwilling to engage in civil discourse.  I wonder how they’d feel if someone behaved like that were they to give a speech.

Shame on DePaul for not stopping this kind of nonsense—and I’m referring to the student disruptions.

 

Robert Wright’s rant against New Atheism

May 26, 2016 • 9:00 am

On his Templeton-funded “MeaningofLife.TV” site, Robert Wright fulminates about New Atheism (click on screenshot below). I’m pleased to see that both Krauss and I are included on Murderers Row along with the remains of the Horsepersons (sadly, Wright identifies me as a “paleontologist,” which is bizarre.) His beef: New Atheists lack “intellectual humility,” instantiated by their belief that “we’re sure that God doesn’t exist”. But that’s not true: we think it highly probable that God doesn’t exist, which is the scientific attitude. (See The God Delusion.)

We’re also said to be advocates of “scientism” and that we see no good products of religion. The “scientism” accusation is a canard, and I’m sure that most of us accept that religion can sometimes motivate good works. The claim is not that, but, on balance, that religion is inimical to human progress.

Screen Shot 2016-05-25 at 11.52.29 AM

As he’s done so often, Wright argues (25:50) that there may be some teleological force behind the universe—something that may, for instance, have created the laws of physics. Although he, like John Horgan, claims to be a nonbeliever, they both fit Dennett’s definition of “believers in belief”: those who say, “Well, I see no need for religion, but it’s really good for all those Other People.” In fact, he’s loath to find any endemic problem with religion; when religion behaves badly, it’s often caused by people who criticize religion (43:30)! The lesson: we should stop criticizing religion, and I think Wright would be really happy if we’d do that.

The bit goes on if you click on the section called “the holy war against religion.” Here Wright takes out against antitheism, the attempt to dispel religious notions held by others.

As I said, MeaningofLife.tv was begun last year with a grant from the Templeton Foundation, and I’m sure they love the attack on New Atheism. So long as somebody attacks the antitheists and also leaves room for the possibility of the divine, as Wright does, the money will keep coming. I just found out that Wright also has an 18-month position as a Visiting Professor of Science and Religion at the Union Theological Seminary, with the mission of finding compatibility between science, spirituality, and religion. Wright’s position is, of course, funded by Templeton. 

UPDATE: At lunch I watched an hour of the 90-minute Union Theological Seminary debate between Wright and Lawrence Krauss, and I recommend it. There’s an epic quarrel about the question of “how do you get a Universe from nothing?”, and that alone is worth the time.

 

h/t: candide001

My last pair of boots: Part 2. Pull straps and beading.

May 26, 2016 • 7:45 am

The production of my last pair of cowboy boots was held up last week because Lee and Carrlyn Miller were hosting the Bootmakers’ Gathering in Saledo, Texas. You can see the beginning of my boots in a previous post, which also links to posts about my earlier visits to Lee Miller’s shop in Austin to see the operation and then to get measured and fitted.

As you’ll see over the next couple weeks, making a custom boot is a laborious and complicated operation that takes great skill and experience. In my opinion, think Lee is the best cowboy bootmaker in the U.S., which means in the world. First, let’s review the parts of a boot:

cowboy-boots-anatomy-diagram-parts

There are four pieces of leather that make up the visible part of the boot: the vamp, or footpiece, the counter, or heelpiece, and then two pieces of leather that constitute the shaft. The two halves of the shaft are joined and then covered with a “bead” (“side seam” or “piping”) in the photo above. There is also beading to cover the naked leather around the boot opening (“scallop” in the above, but mine won’t be scalloped.) Other leather is used to make the pull straps, which is the way you put the boots on, as well as the layers of the heel, and the nonvisible parts of the boot like the insole and lining.

The boot above has fancy inlay, and mine will too, though not inlay like the above. Right now I won’t reveal the design, but the boot is made of kangaroo: rich brown for the counters and vamp, and navy blue for the shafts. Carrlyn was kind enough to send some photos of what is happening; her notes are indented:

Here are your measurements and the last that Lee is working on for you. [JAC: the last is the three dimensional model made to my foot measurements; the boot will be constructed around it.]

Jerry%27s Boots1

Your pull straps have been cut out.

Jerry%27s Boots2

This is the front and back of your order ticket that will follow your boots as they are being made.

Jerry%27s Boots3

As you see from the design below, I’m having a 3/4″ box toe, which requires the complicated construction of a “toe box” to maintain that boxy shape.

Jerry%27s Boots4

Here you can see the vamp and vamp linings that have been taken off the crimping boards. Below that are the counters for your boots.

Jerry%27s Boots5

Charlotte [an apprentice] is preparing to sew your pull straps together.

Jerry%27s Boots6

Charlotte is sewing your pull straps.

Jerry%27s Boots7

We use a silver marking pen to draw the design on the pull. We rub it off after the pulls have been stitched.

Jerry%27s Boots8

The chain stitch sewn on the pull straps.

Jerry%27s Boots9

We make our side and top bead. We use a metal strip as a template to cut out of the leather. [JAC: I didn’t know this, but the piping or beading is made of strips of leather that are rolled, apparently around a string.]

Jerry%27s Boots10

You can see the strip has been cut out. There will be a total of four side beads made.

Jerry%27s Boots11

We cut a string that is the same length as the leather.

Jerry%27s Boots12

The strips are laid out.

Jerry%27s Boots14

We then put cement on the wrong side of the leather strips.

Jerry%27s Boots15

And, we put cement on the strings too. Everything then is allowed to sit and dry.

Jerry%27s Boots16

I am promised more pictures as the boots continue to be made, and of course will post them here.

Spot the iguana!

May 26, 2016 • 7:15 am

We won’t have Readers’ Wildlife today, so whet your appetites for tomorrow. Meanwhile, Stephen Knight, having a break in Mexico, sent a “Spot the X” picture. His caption:

Hope you’re well. I’m currently taking a break in Tulum, Mexico. The resort is crawling with beautiful iguanas. One of them came to oversee our hotel check-in. Can you spot it?

Click the picture to enlarge:

20160525_171927