The Toast has a funny and thoughtful lineup of paintings they say are "inaccurately categorized as 'seduction in art'" on Wikimedia Commons.
I get the point, and I'm glad they make it. But I have to say to The Toast: pretty much anyone over the age of 20 can tell you that "seduction" and "failed seduction" are related. Just because the person pushes you away, even physically, doesn't mean it wasn't a seduction. It was just a failure. I imagine a lot of these paintings would more accurately be called "failed seductions," but that doesn't make them not-seductions, does it? Or has The Toast only experienced successful seduction? Good for them.
No comments:
Post a Comment