It seems to me that a tremendous amount of the mode of power that drives the post-modernist--let's call it, it's not a revolution, --transformation, seems to be driven by resentment of virtually anything that has any, what would you say? any merit of competence or aesthetic quality.And that has been a recurring theme here, not so much the resentment, but the noticing that the denial of aesthetic quality seems to underlie so much cultural commentary. And once you spike that, you are pretty much talking about fashion or sales, aren't you? He goes on, a moment later to say:
There's the destruction ... of the aesthetic quality of the literary or artistic work, it's reduction to nothing but some kind of power game, and then, surrounding that, the reduction of everything to something that approximates a power game, which I can't help but identify with jealousy and resentment.That's rather pathetic isn't it, if the whole post-modern attack on the values of Western Civilization, including most especially aesthetic values, is motivated at its base by the petty resentments of mediocre scholars who simply lack the creative ability to sustain and develop these aesthetic values? I have never quite taken that step of speculating on the reasons for the disparagement of aesthetics. Who knows, perhaps he is correct?
I'm not sure if this is the ideal envoi for this post, but let's listen to Richard Strauss' Death and Transfiguration. This is the Dude, conducting the Vienna Phillies at Salzburg in 2014:
UPDATE: I didn't make it all the way through the Peterson/Paglia conversation myself, but even the first ten or fifteen minutes are quite interesting.