Robert Budras retweetledi
There are many examples of classical art that evoke disgust. For instance, Goya’s "Saturn Devouring His Son," Rubens’s "Massacre of the Innocents," and Géricault’s "Anatomical Pieces." I suspect you would know this if you were better educated in the subject you talk about. In slide one, I’ve attached a photo of Titian’s The Flaying of Marsyas, which depicts the satyr Marsyas being flayed for challenging Apollo. The imagery is obviously designed to evoke disgust.
However, the simple answer to your question is that modern and contemporary art is often entangled in discourse (e.g., theory, media, conceptual frameworks, and so on). It’s not just about depicting a patron’s wealth, devotional images, or government propaganda. We can call these forms of expression “visual languages.” If you don’t understand these languages or are not engaged in the discourse, then some of these pieces may seem as foreign to you as hearing someone speak French or Chinese.
To me, the question is: why do people who purportedly value classic aesthetics so thoroughly abuse and twist these aesthetics? For instance, Pete Hegseth festoons his attire with USA flag belts, pocket squares, and pins. He wears “fun socks” and tan shoes with dark suits. Many nowadays also get contrast-colored buttonholes or wear “dress sneakers” with tailoring. Pourquoi? Why are the most vociferous defenders of “classical aesthetics” so poorly educated in the subject? And why do they so rarely stick to such aesthetics when it comes to decorating their homes or dressing themselves? Everything is twisted beyond recognition.
In my own space (menswear), the best-dressed men in the classical Western tradition tend to be based in East Asia. For instance, Yuhei Yamamoto, founder of Tailor CAID, a bespoke clothier in Japan, does classic American style better than American clothiers. We see him in slide three. Many people in East Asia seem to take these aesthetics much more seriously than their US counterparts.
In my opinion, the answer to this is very simple: people online who purport to love classical aesthetics are not actually interested in art, architecture, or tailoring. They are, instead, culture warriors primarily interested in politics. Classical art and tailoring only serve as ways for them to signal their political identity. It’s the difference between someone who loves mechanical watches for the horology and someone who buys a Rolex because they want people to know they’re rich and successful.
Such people are charlatans and hucksters who use these topics to build audiences, then release a 29.99‑dollar PDF and a line of supplements for their get‑rich schemes. The only thing these people genuinely value is money.
English
