Saturday, July 03, 2010

The hypocrisy of the Duck

The Duck is quite vivid about Commie hacks producing art or placing inane themes into art. An example was the overrated Arthur Miller making the claim that comparing persecution of witches to Communists in the Crucible. Witches are typically harmless and unlike commies were not planning on global hegemony and the authors of wholesale human rights violations.

The Duck frequently criticizes Uris who places Zionism into his work. What works of Uris the Duck has bothered to read is unknown. The Duck usually is quite vocal about appreciation of the art for its merit. Thus when a Conservative points out the idiocy of Arthur Miller or boycotts films with commies like Sean Penn the Duck talks about artistic merit. Obviously, the Duck doesn't grant Uris anywhere near the liberties that he wishes us to take with Communists like Arthur Miller. Miller is assigned reading and perhaps it is time to start the lectures about Stalinist crimes and decades of lies about spies and funding of the Communist party.

Uris is not read as assigned reading via Bolshevik Academic coercion. His readers enjoy his many excellent books that commies seldom bother to read. I did place a God In Ruins on the list of books to read.

I am finishing Rabble in Arms by Roberts. I am around 100 pages from the end. We are now past the Battle of Hubardton which is discussed tangentially. The first 70 pages drag on a bit, but the pace does pick up. Characters introduced there will be seen later in important roles. I will be pausing from Kenneth Roberts to read one of the few Michener books I avoided. I encourage those who may be lacking in vacation reading to pick up some pleasant well crafted novels. It is enjoyable and a better product than you are apt to see on the silver screen.


Speedy G said...

Speaking of the duck's hypocrisy, what do you make of a blogger who says on his profile that he admires "early Renaissance" art, but then ridicules the pre-Raphaelites?

beakerkin said...

The Duck is warped on many levels.

The_Editrix said...

I haven't seen that particular bit so I don't know the details, but why shouldn't lovers of early Renaissance art despise the Pre-Raphaelites as derivative crap and totally artificial? (I don't, in fact, I quite like them, but I fail to understand why love of early Renaissance art should include per se appreciation of the Pre-Raphaelites.)