Disumbrated Art

[Simkin]

The son of a Methodist minister, Paul Jordan-Smith graduated from a school of divinity in 1908 and became a pastor of the Universalist church. In 1910 he had to resign after being charged with heresy. He became a writer. In 1924 he committed blasphemy against the strange gods of modern art.

keep reading

[jbuck919]

Ah yes, our mysterious Simkin, our own Socrates, who only turns up when he wants to make his provocative points about the basis on which we judge whether art is great. (I hasten to add that I do not resent this and think it is a useful function and admire him for his ambition.) The only case I questioned was the literary one, where he stacked the deck by pulling out of Dickens passages (which are easy enough to find) which are as dreadful in the first place as anything to be found in Bulwer-Lytton.

I am reminded of a recital given in New York perhaps 35 years ago by a pianist whose name I do not recall (but it was in a famous venue like Carnegie Recital Hall or some such) in which she played the complete piano works of Schoenberg (such as they are). She got a glowing review from the NY Times critic (at that time the chief critic would have been Harold C. Schonberg but I can't swear that he wrote this review). Unfortunately, the pianist and famous Schoenberg interpreter Paul Jacobs was in the audience, and he politely pointed out in a letter to the editor that the lady had made up at least half the notes and that her performance in no way resembled what Schoenberg had written. I mean, there is the famous story of a painting (was it Matisse?) that hung upside down at the Museum of Modern Art for, I can't remember if it was months or years, before someone noticed.

Such ambiguities are inherent to art, which is not exact science. Even Bernard Berenson, the famous art consultant who helped the barons of the guilded age acquire their collections, got it wrong occastionally when there was a lot less to get wrong.

[Corlyss_D]

Great story, John.

[jbuck919]

Here's another one, inspired by the fact that I read the alumni magazine of my alma mater today and it had something about one of the most famous current professors.

I hate to be so vague about these memories. Corlyss, I'm quite sure I read about this in either Atlantic or Harper's maybe 15 years ago. Someone had the idea to circulate a bunch of writings by allegedly novice authors among a bunch of literary critics and academics for their evaluation. It wa a set-up, with all of the submissions in fact being new short stories or draft excerpts by established figures of modern literature. Mostly, people were fooled, except for one professor at the university where she now teaches. "This is Joyce Carol Oates," he wrote, "who do they think they're fooling?"

[Simkin]

The only case I questioned was the literary one, where he stacked the deck by pulling out of Dickens passages (which are easy enough to find) which are as dreadful in the first place as anything to be found in Bulwer-Lytton.

I selected representative samples of Dickens and Bulwer-Lytton.

I mean, there is the famous story of a painting (was it Matisse?) that hung upside down at the Museum of Modern Art for, I can't remember if it was months or years, before someone noticed.

According to Hoaxes by McDougall it was Margaret Gest's Pink Lilies.
(BTW If it was a view from above it would be very easy to make such a mistake)

[Ralph]

We don't have many lawyers here but you don't have to be one to appreciate the "case opinions" of A.P. Herbert, first appearing in a book, "Uncommon Law." Further volumes came out.

Herbert was a barrister who also had the distinction in a more class-oriented England to be the Member of Parliament for Oxford. Right, just for the university. Cambridge had one too.

A brilliant legal scholar, Herbert created cases that had enough facts to seem real and were then resolved by the application of existing law in a quirky style. But each had enough hints so that anyone really trained in English law would not only recognize the spoof but enjoy it.

Back when I taught Torts I would slip in a photocopy handout of an "Uncommon Law" case and tell the class we'd start the next meeting with it. Which I did Socratically. No one ever realized the joke until I revealed it.

[Corlyss_D]

Bulwer-Lytton.

It was a dark and stormy night . . .

http://www.bulwer-lytton.com/

[Simkin]

Ah yes, our mysterious Simkin, our own Socrates

"Now, is Simkin a nazi? I don't think so, he's just another creationist, simple-minded, logic-hating, religious right Kincaid lover beating a long-dead horse into a pulp. But hey -- he can dream, right? Maybe one day he'll be able to be a real Nazi, with his own jackboots and tiny mustache. And when that day comes, I'm sure he'll write a new quiz for us, all about how great the Nazis are and how everything else in the world is inferior to them. I just can't wait!"

http://forums.craigslist.org/?ID=42565825

[Corlyss_D]

Well, at least you're consistent, Sim.

[Simkin]

A brilliant legal scholar, Herbert created cases that had enough facts to seem real and were then resolved by the application of existing law in a quirky style. But each had enough hints so that anyone really trained in English law would not only recognize the spoof but enjoy it.

Back when I taught Torts I would slip in a photocopy handout of an "Uncommon Law" case and tell the class we'd start the next meeting with it. Which I did Socratically. No one ever realized the joke until I revealed it.

In contrast, Paul-Jordan-Smith never painted before and still was able to pull of the hoax.