ADDED: Jac (who's seen the gallery exhibit in person) notes that the NYT critic Holland Cutter says that Basil Wolverton's art "comes across as spectacularly misogynistic." Jac says:
Based on what I've seen, he was at least as cruel to men, and he chose male subjects more often than women... As long as we're going to look at the art through a politically correct lens, wouldn't a more straightforward criticism be that his cartoons are offensive to people with actual deformities?
Yeah, such as people with penis-like noses.
Posts
2 comments:
Sometimes a nose looks like a penis.
"He reserved some of his most repellent effects for images of women. Like so much of American culture in the '50s, when a new feminist consciousness was just beginning to coalesce, his work comes across as spectacularly misogynistic. That he turns men into freaks too doesn't really alter the impression that Wolverton's art is a for-boys-only art."
Holland Cotter can eat shit.
Post a Comment