David Atherton, who is a British Libertarian Free Speech advocate and writer for Breitbart, posted a Tweet contrasting images of London’s Piccadilly Circus from 1965 to today.
Apologies if this is necroing (very new to Substack, so not sure if that's at all a thing here), but it would've been nice to actually have any examples of what you were talking about in regards to right-wing art actually showcased.
Like the other comment mentioned, there are 36 links in this relatively short writeup. Not that I think that's a problem, as unlike him, I very much prefer having more links than less, but what I do think is a problem is having absolutely no links to any of the supposed right-wing art movements mentioned.
Where exactly is this "neon nationalism" you're talking about? Or this supposedly "growing Bohemian right scene", or "retrofuturism"? Who, or even what is it? That's what I came here to see, not the many examples of hideous woke art both shown in images as well as repeatedly linked. It feels almost emblematic of the right as a whole that in a writeup about the leftist control of art, and leftist destruction of beauty, and even a brief mention of right-wing self-sabotage with 2016 MAGA, that even the author himself completely failed to give even the most miniscule support possible to right-wing artists.
A peer I respect shared this article and I've tried to read this but had to stop.
You have 36 external links, not counting your 'source' links, in this essay.
Do you want readers to read your essay or read these 36 external pages?
Is understanding anything in this essay contingent on reading any of those 36 links? If not, why include them directly in the text in this way.
I mean this in the most constructive way possible but stop doing this. This is an aesthetically a terrible experience when trying to read and consume the ideas in your essay. You are risking the loss of the reader to distraction of clicking and being taken away.
If you feel these links are important just footnote them and source link at the end.
Apologies if this is necroing (very new to Substack, so not sure if that's at all a thing here), but it would've been nice to actually have any examples of what you were talking about in regards to right-wing art actually showcased.
Like the other comment mentioned, there are 36 links in this relatively short writeup. Not that I think that's a problem, as unlike him, I very much prefer having more links than less, but what I do think is a problem is having absolutely no links to any of the supposed right-wing art movements mentioned.
Where exactly is this "neon nationalism" you're talking about? Or this supposedly "growing Bohemian right scene", or "retrofuturism"? Who, or even what is it? That's what I came here to see, not the many examples of hideous woke art both shown in images as well as repeatedly linked. It feels almost emblematic of the right as a whole that in a writeup about the leftist control of art, and leftist destruction of beauty, and even a brief mention of right-wing self-sabotage with 2016 MAGA, that even the author himself completely failed to give even the most miniscule support possible to right-wing artists.
Fantastic post Robert, I hope it gets more attention. Good heavens we live in such an ugly world now.
A peer I respect shared this article and I've tried to read this but had to stop.
You have 36 external links, not counting your 'source' links, in this essay.
Do you want readers to read your essay or read these 36 external pages?
Is understanding anything in this essay contingent on reading any of those 36 links? If not, why include them directly in the text in this way.
I mean this in the most constructive way possible but stop doing this. This is an aesthetically a terrible experience when trying to read and consume the ideas in your essay. You are risking the loss of the reader to distraction of clicking and being taken away.
If you feel these links are important just footnote them and source link at the end.