Does Zadie Smith disagree with the left? Howard goes to the Rembrandt Appreciation and dismantles the great artist. But as he's talking, he realizes it's boring, always telling the same stories and researching the same actions, dissecting a person's motives who has been dead for hundreds of years. Just because they've been idolized and canonized, does that mean they weren't good artists? Does that mean their works shouldn't be studied or appreciated?
Zora threatens to expose her father's affair in order to get into a creative writing course. In this instance, do universities defend beauty? No. Is Carl a pawn in the game of whether a university defends beauty? He meets the Belsey's at the Mozart concert because he's a musician and wants to better his music by studying the musicians of the past. "It might not be poetry poetry but it's what I do." Carl defines beauty as something outside university - outside grades, outside politics, outside structure. The structure of the university is what holds the students back because they force them to study for grades, not for the simple love of learning.
During Howard's class, he claims the left says beauty is a mask the power wears. I disagree. For example, when he's talking about Rembrandt painting for his patrons, that because he painted it, it's beautiful but in reality, it's just another representation of the power, the money which payed for the painting. I think he's totally wrong. I think people can love and enjoy what they do and get paid for it. I think they can create something beautiful that was bought and paid for by others, simply because he took the time to create it. I can remember writing a paper about learning to write for others and finding peace in it. Just because it's for someone else doesn't mean I can't add my own personal touches and enjoy the topic. I can write a good paper that's beautiful that was written for the "powerful" because I wrote it. "...And that has made all the difference."
No comments:
Post a Comment