I often stress the separation of art & artist for the sake of argument but it is dishonest of me, for I too am obsessed with the life of the artist. the difference between myself & the slack jawed human tractors who cry “Sinner!” is that I find artists’ immorality compelling.
-
Show this thread
-
to tell me that this or that person, responsible for reaching into the heavens & capturing beauty to let loose on this earth, is guilty of violence or sexual debauchery or thoughtcrime is only to create a dichotomy from which I cannot tear my gaze.
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likesShow this thread -
so bring forth the monsters & the sadists, the cruel & the oppressive; their great sins allow them to see the face of God, an image they act as conduit for as it bleeds into our world.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @kai_warmoth
personally I find that it mars their artistry to me. I think this is just an intuitive thing. Madness is one thing, debauchery another.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @gtaogle
the two are of little difference to me, personally. both make art breathe and resonate. but in that same vein, piousness and neurotic rigidity can have the same effect. I simply appreciate extremes.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @kai_warmoth
fact is, most debauchery is neurotic rigidity.... and those who are debauched descend into it rather rapidly as I've observed in addictions. I understand the distaste for Puritans, I share it
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
amazing qualities are a razor's edge... but if you understand that the "Puritans" so called were not actually righteous but mad heretics, and that kind of Puritanism is itself a vice... well, that's my position anyway I guess their "righteous" violence has a certain quality.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
