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
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.