Author Topic: Hiding Behind Psychobabble  (Read 131 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

rangerrebew

  • Guest
Hiding Behind Psychobabble
« on: February 20, 2020, 03:02:26 pm »
Hiding Behind Psychobabble

Theodore Dalrymple

February 15, 2020
 

There was a very curious letter to the editor in the latest edition of the English monthly magazine The Critic. It was from a correspondent who defended the type of architecture known as brutalist, that is to say of buildings constructed of and faced with large blocks of raw concrete. The letter concluded as follows:

    I love Brutalism, and believe every example of it should be preserved, but I would never call it beautiful, any more than I would call it ugly. I just happen to find it unique and interesting, and I find it condescending to be told otherwise.

The writer seems to imply that aesthetic considerations played no part in his estimate of the worth of a building, only its uniqueness and interest. His ideal of a city, then, would be one composed of freaks, since freakishness is the royal—which is to say easiest—road to uniqueness, and freaks are, whatever else they may be, invariably interesting. As every writer knows, it is easier to depict a bad man interestingly than a good one. But this is not an argument in favor of bad men.

https://www.takimag.com/article/hiding-behind-psychobabble/

rangerrebew

  • Guest
Re: Hiding Behind Psychobabble
« Reply #1 on: February 20, 2020, 03:04:03 pm »
This describes democrat candidates for POTUS.  Meaningless, empty psychobabble because they have nothing to offer. *look*