Good morning, Blogsters. I was thinking about a theory of aesthetics that I invented (though I doubt it is an idea that only I could have come up with) some time ago--that of the Abysmal Sublime. It goes this way: Is it possible that a work of art can be so bad, so inept or ill-conceived or poorly made, so, in a word abysmal, that it transcends its own badness and becomes something, if not sublime (an exaggeration, surely), then aesthetically arresting? Its own badness somehow inverts its aesthetics to become something unique and beautiful? Minnie Ripperton's "Loving You" is such a uniquely bad song that I, somehow enjoy it. I don't want to hear it more than three times in a row, mind you, but I don't turn it off if it's on the radio. Same with Captain and Tenille's "Muskrat Love" and Starland Vocal Band's "Afternoon Delight." And I think this is more than just a kitsch appreciation. It's much more. These songs are transgressive in some ways, but bumblingly so. I don't think their composers ever thought they were expressing anything but honest sentiments, of course, but they take real liberties: Ripperton's orgasmic, ear-drum puncturing high note; the muskrat noises made on the moog synthesizer; the quavering, scaling harmony (is it five-part?) on the word "an" at the finish of "Afternoon Delight"--these are strokes of schlocky genius! They go where no one else would because most normal people recognize the boundaries of good taste. These artists have obliterated that boundary and stomped all over that ground. I'll never say these are good songs--they're horrible!--but they occupy that grey area where east meets west, where communism becomes fascism, where hell meets heaven--where the abysmal touches the sublime.
~
Your task, dear reader, is to identify other works which are abysmally sublime and make a case for them. Here are more possibilities, listed as my daily five: (1) Glen or Glenda, directed by Ed Wood; (2) Ravel's "Bolero"; (3) "Birth of Venus", Alexandre Cabanel's painting, not to be confused with Botticelli's simply sublime "Venus Anadyomene" or "Venus Rising from the Sea" (otherwise known as "Birth of Venus" or "Venus on the Half-Shell") (4); the novel The Castle of Otranto by Horace Walpole (which gave rise to that most abysmally sublime of literary genres, the gothic novel); (5) the paintings of Giovanni Boldini, the sultan of swish. Any takers.......?
~
Also, I'm interested in things that are common misconceptions but are not worth fighting over. Take, for instance, the word forte. Technically speaking, this word is not accented on the final e. It simply rhymes with snort. This is a fact. Yet, if I ever pronounce it the correct way (which I have resigned myself never to do), I will in turn be wrongly corrected. Is this worth arguing over? I think not, not unless I want to look like an asshole. But it's hugely annoying! Same with Botticelli's "Birth of Venus" above. Can you, dear reader, add something to this growing list of common misconceptions not worth fighting over? Or do you want to claim that some are worth fighting over? Here's one: The Immaculate Conception is not the conception of Jesus! It's the conception of Mary in the womb of St. Anne. I saw a book on renaissance art the other day that made that mistake--on Piero della Francesca's "Madonna del Parto," of all things. I know we all make mistakes, but sheesh.
And here's the totally sublime Ian:
Adios,
JBF
No comments:
Post a Comment