NYTIMES THEATER REVIEW CELEBRATES PERVERSITY

NYTIMES: "Sweet Are the Uses of Perversity" -

... The spring season in New York is, happily and atypically, plump with demonstrations of such genre bending, with entrancingly wicked shows that extract the profane from the sacred and the rot from the pillars of society.

[About one the 3 plays reviewed - emphasis added:] ...You could also say that it single-handedly dragged the British sex farce from the realm of seaside-postcard naughtiness into a land-mined field of subversion. In portraying two middle-aged, middle-class siblings drooling over the same cute young thing (a male hustler, in this case), Orton revealed not only the sagging flesh beneath his characters' rigorously conventional clothes but also the wayward, wanton itches beneath the skin. And how many other sex farces blithely factor in sadistic murder?

... The erotic dimension, though, is subjugated to the greater, and disturbingly pertinent, theme about how spin shapes what we think of as rock-hard history.

This review PROVES (once again) that the editors of the NYTIMES actively endorse an ideology which is OPENLY hostile to traditional values and to objectivity. They are thoroughly post-modern in their ridicule of everything which has made our civilization free and properous - namely bourgeois culture - and their revulsion for normalcy, and their contempt for traditional Judeo-Christian values, which they deem repressive and anti-libidinal.

Of course, like good little post-modernists, they also deny that there can be any objective history (only "spin"). Er um, they believe this is true for everyone EXCEPT for themselves and THEIR read of history! What hypocrites! What perverted and subversive hypocrites! What scum.

BOTTOM-LINE: I am glad people are free to write, perform, observe and critique whatever they want - even the perverse plays reviewed in the linked-to article. If producers want to put on PERVERSE pays and if people want to act in them and pay to see them, and if newspaper reporters want to praise them for their perversity: FINE. People are rightly free to critique my traditional bourgoise values - in plays, movies, and reviews - ANYWHERE THEY CHOOSE. And I am free to critique their critique of my values, too.

MY CRITIQUE: I know the difference between a pigs ear and a silk purse, and won't let anyone tell me the former is the latter. "High" art cannot be both high and serve perversness anymore than a war can be called a just war if it serves perverseness. SIMPLY PUT: If the intentions which inform the act are perverse, then the act is perverse. And we should no more praise perversity than praise chaos, poverty or ignorance.

I would argue that completely "unfettered" human liberty - human liberty that has no respect for Natural Law - always devolves into libertinage, and that this is ultimately destructive to the perpetrators, to society and to culture.

When a newspaper review praises a work which "BLITHELY FACTORS IN SADISTIC MURDER," then I think it is clear that they NO LONGER HAVE A FUCTIONAL OR DEFENSIBLE MORAL COMPASS - not the NYTIMES, not their reviewer, and not the playwright or the producers or the actors or the people in the audience who "GET OFF" on "blithe murderous sadism." People who cannot condemn sadistic sex murderers are amoral at best.

That many chic literati do praise perversity proves only that many are degenerates; they are in fact nothing more than a chic degenerati, and their praise of perversity - posing this time as a review - is no better than a happy sports report from a bloody cockfight. Puns intended.

ASIDE: Isn't it "RICH" that these chic degenerati are the very same people who condemn Bush for fighting a war of liberation!? YUP: To these "perverted subversives", sadists in plays who murder prostitutes deserve praise, but a president who toppled totalitarian regimes which perpetrated crimes against humanity - which murdered and tortured hundreds of thousands of their own citizens - he deserves condemnation. Sheesh. If that doesn't prove to you how basically IMMORAL this chic degenerati crowd is then NOTHING will!

Their fervent anti-traditionalism is why the post-modern Left has had a problem supporting our side in The Long War: Like our enemy, they too want to bring our culture down. Unfortunately for the post-modernists, they don't even appreciate the fact that Bush is far FAR less of a threat to their libertinage than are the jihadoterrorists.

EQUALLY IRONIC IS THIS FACT: Those of us who unabashedly support our side in The Long War are not only defending our nation and the Free World and Natural Law (and its bedrock concept of Universal Human Rights), we are also defending our "perversely subversive" chic degenerati foes - (who abhor Natural Law) - right here at home. Our victory is theirs.

[NOTE: It is fitting that (a) one of the plays reviewed in this column in the NYTIMES stars well-known BDS-afflicted Bush-basher actor Alec Baldwin, and (b) that another article in the NYTIMES announces that the unabashedly Leftist play AWAKE AND SING will also be opening in NYC soon. This further proves that the "sexual perversity crowd" and the "socialism crowd" are one and the same. Essentially, one might say, they have ONE PLANK in their PLATFORM: the desire to destroy the bourgeoisee, to obliterate its economic systems and and cultural values.]