The Daily Sceptic first:
Then our reader/commenter Toodles, a lady from the deep south Alabama, near Gulf Shores ... she lives with blacks here, there and everywhere. As a genuine Christian, she most certainly is not anti-black:
That portrait is a sham (and a shame)!!! So disrespectful to your princess.
I have several paint-by-number oils at the river. One is of a boat and a boathouse. Another is of a ship on the seas. Somewhere I have stashed away two paintings of ponies frolicking in a meadow.
Painting them was fun (well, for somebody) and took discipline. They also kept children busy for a while on a rainy summer’s day. It was a 1960’s era and maybe 50’s era activity. The quality of those ‘it takes no talent’ paintings far exceed the workmanship of that piece of rubbish done by that woman.
My silly old child-like pieces would probably garner more $’s at a garage sell (car boot sale) than her putrid and insulting piece depicting Princess* Catherine could ever do.
My dog could paint better with his tail and he is dead!
While Toodles downplays her own artwork, I can say that the artistic talent of the ladies who grace the N.O. pages, the sense of colour, shade, texture ... well, I'm not mentioning myself in the same breath.
And to add to that, regulars at N.O. know very well I like to go to certain black reactors to music videos because they feel it right here inside, their sense of musical artistry, of soul, is spot on. And you'll notice a black gal presenting in N.O.s Thursday 18 last evening ... why? Because the gal is sharp, right on the money, honest, learning.
Those reading this ustd well that I'm categorically stating that the Woke insta-reaction to our seething take on the portrait is very complicated ... it is primarily that the work itself is a piece of excrement, deeply disrespectful to the Princess* but my ire, maybe our ire, is directed at whoever thought such a diversity hire was a great way to stick it to the indigenous of the isles, because any criticism whatever was going to be auto-labelled racist.
Aim? To do dirt on both the Princess* (*I'm not using the word Duchess ... pointedly) and on the people she comes from.
This was deliberate and whoever commissioned it needs investigating and exposing. It may be that we then need to investigate whoever it was who appointed that person etc. This entire thing was signed off by some high-up, like the excrescence of the Chas3 "portrait", plus "artwork" littered about many town centres up and down the country.
At this deeply troubling time in our history, facing the greatest crisis for a hundred years, give or take. Someone above is deliberately provoking us to the point we'll turn on the other ethnicities in the way which happened in Rwanda soon after Kissinger had visited for some time, in the way which happened in Darfur shortly after the UN "observers" arrived, in the way which happened in Kosovo shortly after ... in the way which happened in the Ukraine in 2014 and afterwards.
...........
Pedantic note ... yes, I'm aware that it's "to whom", not "to who" ... but overall, it sounded better in that text.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Unburden yourself here: