3 ms·
Yeah, he's a very well regarded novelist. So is Knut Hamsun. Ezra Pound is a well regarded poet. Marinetti is quite important w/r/t the modern art movements of
by RobertKerans 6y ago
Yeah, he's a very well regarded novelist. So is Knut Hamsun. Ezra Pound is a well regarded poet. Marinetti is quite important w/r/t the modern art movements of the early 20thC. Pirandello is pretty brilliant. Henry William Williamson wrote some lovely books: Tarka the Otter is still widely read. And so on. But it would be a bit strange if there were an article linked on the front page of HN that implied their personal political ideals were something that was needed in these times, no?
- Apocryphon 6y agoH.P. Lovecraft is probably the best analogue. In both cases it's pretty difficult to separate the man's regressive worldview with the art. Of course it doesn't mean you should ignore, much less censor the art, but it doesn't exactly mean you should elevate the worldview without criticism and re-contexutalization either.
- RobertKerans 6y agoYes, I was trying to think of a US example that wasn't Ezra Pound. I find the article a little off. It feels a bit fetishistic. It's got an appeal to a fictional past where people discussed weighty moral issues (compared to nowadays when people don't bother!). Bemoans that he died to soon, but that his [nationalist and militaristic] ideals are becoming more acceptable. Uses Bowie as an example -- someone who played explicitly with fascist imagery (and who had to excuse the worst of it as being due to too much coke). Implies that people nowadays are weak. I get the fascination with Mishima -- he's a fascinating character. But the article left a really bad taste in my mouth