Felix Cherniavsky - Clippings 1900s 1

Added 18th Mar 2022 by Beth Dobson (Archives and Programming Assistant, DCD) / Last update 18th Mar 2022

Maud Allan 303 51 2008-1-29.jpg
Maud Allan 303 51 2008-1-29.jpg
(No description added)

Felix Cherniavsky - Clippings 1900s 1

Discover Placeholder
Description
The description of this Item
Collections
The collections that this item appears in.
Maud Allan Research Collection
Tags
Tag descriptions added by humans
Identified Objects
Description of the objects in this Item

Auto-generated content

Auto Tags
Tag descriptions added automatically
text handwriting letter book paper photo screenshot document
Auto Objects
Auto-generated identification of objects in this Item
Auto Description
An autogenerated description of this Item
Text, letter
Face count
Auto-generated number of faces in the Item
0
Accession Number
DCD's accession number for this Item. It is the unique identifier.
51.2008-1-29
Original Filename
Extracted text
THEATRE Theatre Week , January 11 , 1907 Gearse kirally & John Solymosi translators Miss Maud Allen oh , is there one who doesn't know this name declares that the female body is beautiful . According to her logic , female nudity is art . Put what is art ? To Miss Maud Allen , artistic direction is a display of her bare self to the hungry ( curious ) public . Wonderful swindles ( confusion ] occur between the beautiful in art , and its supposed inseparableness from art . It has long been thought that all you have to do is " milk " Beauty , and the positive criterion of art will be received . And it was explained : " Beauty is the manifestation of God in man . In Beautiful form is revealed Truth and Goodness . " " Beauty is that which is beautiful for its own sake " . and hundreds of other various such definitions . All these existed without any common positive criterion , and the time eventually arrived when the absolute possible using meta physical means expired , ( and we have arrived at the last gasp in the numerous poetic philosophizations about Beauty ) . But how does one measure , and more significantly , compare Beauty to that which is recognized as art ? That is only known by the [ Hungarian Scientific ] Academy and Szana Tamás ( another critic 3. Today I search for artistry in art , posi tive psychological processess that reveal certain tangible signs , and I bravely cast away ( mere ) Beauty , because in is utilizing the same old trash in place of art , itřno longer art . For example , the paintines of Innocent are masterpieces , but there is not the slightest measure of art in them ; so te find mannequins on display in hair salons that are pretty , but have nothing to do with art . ( Apparently , a current custom was the use of mannequins in such shops for display . ) Aesthet icians that may similarly view Beauty , will quarrel about the same picture , and where they agree , it is certain that they like the model or theme , and the picture they like is trash , because trash is none other than an artistic production , only