At first, I felt a little naive at first sight. I try to look at its childish attitude and open-minded attitude with ugly eyes with my Buddhist nature and inclusive mentality of "taking advantage" I thought that art was pluralistic and it was right to publicize individuality, but I tolerated it. However, it is slowly discovered that this font has become popular in the society in recent years, and it is often seen and even found everywhere. Ugliness has gradually become a trend, which is really hard to bear!
Later, I didn't know what "Han and Wei calligraphy" was. Not to mention that the calligrapher who founded this calligraphy style was born after 90, and how many calligraphy skills and aesthetic accomplishments he had. Say those experts who put this font into computer fonts used by the public and vigorously promote it, where is your minimum sense of public space and aesthetic morality? Didn't you think it would reduce the aesthetic taste of the public?
Yes, aesthetics is free, art is diversified, and radish and eggplant have their own hobbies. This kind of book is wild, unassuming, rough and cathartic? You love writing, and it doesn't matter if you like it. However, if you want to enter the public space, you must think well and need a certain threshold. Not everything can be seen in the street.
Mr Cai Yuanpei said that "China people need aesthetic education most"? Indeed, China people urgently need aesthetic consciousness, especially public aesthetic consciousness, because people's aesthetic enlightenment education is often aesthetic information from public space. We often see some ugly buildings, sculptures, calligraphy and so on. In our field of vision. Some are vulgar and ugly, grotesque and exaggerated, and some are seriously divorced from the aesthetic consciousness of order and harmony that people have generally established. They also euphemistically said that aesthetics is free, and it is the publicity of self-personality and so on. Who knows that this just infringes on others' aesthetics or deprives others of their aesthetic rights.
? Some people say that there is no standard for beauty and ugliness, and different groups have different judgments in different times. Yes, judging ugliness is a way of thinking. Whether it is out of curiosity, emotional pleasure, maverick resistance to authority or spiritual pursuit, it is essentially a kind of review and revision of the times, but in the end it must conform to people's instinct for "beauty", just like Duchamp's "Dadaism", and "ugliness" is also a part of beauty.
? The philosopher Kant believes that the most important mission of intellectuals is to pay attention to public space and have rational control in it. And some of our so-called experts and scholars either pay attention to the court or themselves, that is, they pay attention to too little public space for the public, and of course they lack rational control. Therefore, this phenomenon of taking ugliness as beauty has produced some mysterious shock in this impetuous society, and the public's aesthetics have become confused. This vulgar font has actually become popular. What Jung said is a collective unconscious phenomenon.
? We must understand that public aesthetics and personal aesthetic freedom are two different things, and there must be a rational control over the aesthetics of public space. This is the responsibility of intellectuals and those who hold public power, and it is also the aesthetic morality that each of us should have.
I feel the same way when I saw a popular post in vulgar font today. I'm not sad about it. )