Free-Thought

Robert Renak, Wimbledon
The subject was not creativity out of personal conflict but from conflict with society, or societal norms, citing members of the Bloomsbury set, and making homosexuality the source of conflict.The speakers approach is on full accord with Bloomsbury. He describes an artisitc attitude that can be aptly summed up as ' the art of a coterie, by a coterie and for a coterie'.The Bloomsbury set spawned many of the cultural misfortunes of the 20th century, from a self-serving and anti-social elitism in art to fascist tendencies in socio-political matters.It is not the world that looks on admiringly at this sort of art, but the small self-admiring group that produce it, and their critical hangers-on. They make their inverted preferences, in this case sexual preferences, into a self-serving rallying call, which they then have the cheek to dress in the clothing of great art, an heirloom they have abducted from a culture that beautified the normal.On the specific sexual point, suppose a coterie founded on a preference for rape, pairing those whose sexual excitement came from raping with those whose excitement derived from being raped. This, too, could spawn a lively art, flaunting its difference before the public. Would Mr Holloway come on the radio to sing the praises of these peoples state of conflict?