The disunion of words like
“creative” and “populist” is a peculiar 21st century phenomenon,
however insofar as joining these words to a theme, it has come to the fore in
2017.
I know this as I peruse my stash
of The New York Times 2015 “Book
Review” before the 2016 election of Trump.
Yet I am astonished at what The New York Tines April 16, 2017 “Book
Review” chooses to theme now becomes fulsomely aimed toward a “political” agenda
with the opposing BOOKENDS claim of examining the “harmful” aspect of arts linking
“elitism” or “populism.”
And I am further confused when one
BOOKEND writer Adam Kirsch uses a first paragraph to opinionate about the age
of Trump.
Mr. Kirsch nails down the
political with the words “deepening” and “abyss” in spite of the word “elitism”
as signifies a snob, and “populism” to describe the common, but to employ
another word: “deepening” furthermore Mr. Kirsch adds a word intensify: “abyss” for the political aim of the derogatory: a
bottomless pit?
As well The New York Tines April 16, 2017 “Book Review” BOOKEND opposing writer, Liesl Schillinger
links the word “taste” with the disunion word “ideology,” but concludes with
the notion: “artists must be granted the freedom” a political summed up
“ideology” when she uses the “elitism” and “populism” in the same paragraph as
“attack” and “unworthy.”
The word “ideology” is about
belief to Ms. Schillinger as is The New
York Times theme: 2017 mindset politics.
I am saddened that the once fine
erudite The New York Tines is willing
to destroy even its lauded “Book Review” toward a determined political intent,
for this assertive and destructive trash POTUS 45 theme, that has taken over
the entire newspaper.
No comments:
Post a Comment