3 ms·

What a nothingburger. A man who lived centuries ago made comments about people who look different that we now interpret as unkind. He also drew some of these pe

What a nothingburger. A man who lived centuries ago made comments about people who look different that we now interpret as unkind. He also drew some of these people.

namdnay 4y ago
Sometimes “nothing burgers” make for an interesting read. TAL is basically a podcast of nothing burgers, doesn’t stop it from being great And the fact that there’s an exhibition on with these works is always good to know from a “news” perspective
- coldtea 4y ago
  >Sometimes “nothing burgers” make for an interesting read. That's the problem. It's how a Big Mac makes for an interesting eat. Interesting but not nutricious...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
throwaway4aday 4y ago
Not so much a nothingburger as simply poorly written. The focus of the article seems to be on the possibly "problematic" side of da Vinci going so far as to hint at his supposed pretty privilege and wonder if he chuckled at his own caricatures which is an absurdly retrospective judgement. There are far more interesting facets to da Vinci's work and life than whether or not his attitudes towards ugly people would be acceptable in the morality du jour. The article even admits that da Vinci's notes make no mention of ugliness in a pejorative sense, highlighting that he referred to one of them as a viso fantastico. They make a U turn and attempt to climb up out of the hole they've dug for themselves talking about his interest in anatomy and ageing and tries to make a worn out point about the Mona Lisa's possible androgyny but it's about as striking as a wet noodle. Anyone who thinks the Mona Lisa is overly masculine is probably just a man who hasn't seen many women without makeup on. It's all rather transparent click bait that's aimed at riling people up. Incredibly dull when compared to even the most factual and plainly written biography of da Vinci.
- bangkoksbest 4y ago
  That is not the focus of the article at all. The very first paragraph starts with a sympathetic quote of Da Vinci's. The third paragraph approvingly suggests his drawings were foreshadowing Munch and Bacon's art. Almost every other paragraph is also a sympathetic reading of Da Vinci's drawings that are being featured an upcoming art exhibition. You've invented a strawman and then sneered at the author for not following through with it, and then, it seems, you became overly sensitive about the comment on androgyny with Mona Lisa, as if that comment is offensive and denigrating (it's not, and the author didn't intend it as such, but it does reveal that you think it is offensive).
- JohnClark1337 4y ago
  [dead]

What a nothingburger. A man who lived centuries ago made comments about people who look different that we now interpret as unkind. He also drew some of these people.

namdnay 4y ago

Sometimes “nothing burgers” make for an interesting read. TAL is basically a podcast of nothing burgers, doesn’t stop it from being great And the fact that there’s an exhibition on with these works is always good to know from a “news” perspective

coldtea 4y ago
>Sometimes “nothing burgers” make for an interesting read. That's the problem. It's how a Big Mac makes for an interesting eat. Interesting but not nutricious...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

throwaway4aday 4y ago

Not so much a nothingburger as simply poorly written. The focus of the article seems to be on the possibly "problematic" side of da Vinci going so far as to hint at his supposed pretty privilege and wonder if he chuckled at his own caricatures which is an absurdly retrospective judgement. There are far more interesting facets to da Vinci's work and life than whether or not his attitudes towards ugly people would be acceptable in the morality du jour. The article even admits that da Vinci's notes make no mention of ugliness in a pejorative sense, highlighting that he referred to one of them as a viso fantastico. They make a U turn and attempt to climb up out of the hole they've dug for themselves talking about his interest in anatomy and ageing and tries to make a worn out point about the Mona Lisa's possible androgyny but it's about as striking as a wet noodle. Anyone who thinks the Mona Lisa is overly masculine is probably just a man who hasn't seen many women without makeup on. It's all rather transparent click bait that's aimed at riling people up. Incredibly dull when compared to even the most factual and plainly written biography of da Vinci.

bangkoksbest 4y ago
That is not the focus of the article at all. The very first paragraph starts with a sympathetic quote of Da Vinci's. The third paragraph approvingly suggests his drawings were foreshadowing Munch and Bacon's art. Almost every other paragraph is also a sympathetic reading of Da Vinci's drawings that are being featured an upcoming art exhibition. You've invented a strawman and then sneered at the author for not following through with it, and then, it seems, you became overly sensitive about the comment on androgyny with Mona Lisa, as if that comment is offensive and denigrating (it's not, and the author didn't intend it as such, but it does reveal that you think it is offensive).
JohnClark1337 4y ago
[dead]