Bought another book. I was hanging around the art criticism section of the racks at Borders last night drinking the coffee I knew I'd need to shoot first Sabbat, the Goth/fetish club, then the underground art show. I found two little books that I thought might be worth reading and sat down on the only empty easy chair in the place, pulled up a footstool for the coffee mug and the book not actually being read, and started looking at them.

The first, After the End of Art : Contemporary Art and the Pale of History, a book by Arthur Danto I'll probably buy later. The one I got is Beauty and the Contemporary Sublime, by Jeremy Gilbert-Rolfe, a faculty member (probably understating that) at Art Center. And the first thing I noticed in reading the introduction is his reference to Kant's distinction between Beauty and The Sublime. And his reference to how they are perceived as obsolete since Duchamp's use of ordinary objects out of context pronounced as art. Duchamp pretty much canceled the idea that beauty is a requirement of art, and also challenged the idea of an objective taste. As a result of his work, Kant's Critique of Judgement has lost much of it's authority. Gilbert-Rolfe is reaffirming Kant, but in doing so, instead of using seascapes to illustrate The Sublime and paintings to illustrate Beauty he's using fashion models and fashion photography. (I think I have this right. Haven't even really started the book yet.)

The use of the model as Sublime while the photograph is Beauty provides a clear distinction between the picture of the beautiful girl and the beautiful picture of the girl - a distinction much lacking on most of the web.

The author also challenges the assumption that The Sublime is superior to Beauty. As the sublime is primarily a product of nature, and not made by humans, it's been attributed to God. Anything made by God must be superior to anything made by man, the thought process goes. If one takes God out of the equation, a humanist point of view would state the opposite. Beauty created by man is superior to an accident of nature, as it takes intent and effort.

And one final point I'm looking forward to reading about is the question of sex and the assignment of Beauty and The Sublime to feminine and masculine realms. I don't understand what he's saying, but so far Gilbert-Rolfe has stated (reinforcing Schiller's definitions) that Beauty is feminine andThe Sublime is masculine. And he assigns much of today's sexual ambiguity to a male need for beauty. Keep in mind we're not talking about sexuality here, but abstract concepts.

But what really made me interested in this book is his mention of almost all the authors I've recently been reading, including Foucault, Kant, Eco, Greenberg, Burke and Burger, and the way he pulls together the first and last movies ever shown at an Orange County drive in theater, Strategic Air Command and Beavis and Butthead Do America, as a critique of our culture (he hates both of them, but likes the dual meaning of "Do"). And he even references Corvettes as the American misunderstanding of European values. (I always get a chuckle out of SUV "Euro accessories.")

So, I write to you twelve (12) pages into the book highly recommending it.

After the bookstore I went home, dressed in my best fetish-wear (there's another real strange word) and photographed Sabbat, drank Guinness, proceeded to an underground art show, hit on some Goth chicks, who were amused, but tolerant, drank a bunch of Absolut Peppar straight, sorta came home (yes, all by myself) and rolled out of bed this afternoon.

There will be some more new club stuff in a few days. And maybe some more ranting about this book, especially if it fails to meet my high expectations based on the superb first 12 pages.

-Don