It’s not just Shakespeare of course

Using his business acumen, he has pored over figures that he believes literary scholars have struggled to understand: “You get some very brilliant academic writing about Shakespeare. The minute they try to talk about money or numbers, it becomes almost incomprehensible.”

Because the arts graduates are arts graduates because they’re not very comfortable with numbers….

9 thoughts on “It’s not just Shakespeare of course”

  1. “Because the arts graduates are arts graduates because they’re not very comfortable with numbers….”

    To be fair, that’s pretty much how engineers and physicists think of economists.

  2. It’s not just numbers these arts grads fail to understand. Increasingly, they also fail at understanding the arts.

    See for example the caption under the picture accompanying the Guardian article:

    A detail from a 16th century painting of William Shakespeare buying a fashionable new collar.

    As the Bard would have said, had he the benefit of a modern comprehensive education: “LOL WUT?”

    I’m just a pleb whose proletarian tastes embrace such cultural delicacies as Pot Noodles, Robot Wars, and Viz magazine, and even I know that’s bollocks.

    Idiocracy was right. At this rate of decline, I expect the Guardian and the Telegraph to be merged into The Beano in five years’ time.

    Walter the Softy and George Monbiot are basically the same person anyway.

  3. Steve,

    “I’m just a pleb whose proletarian tastes embrace such cultural delicacies as Pot Noodles, Robot Wars, and Viz magazine, and even I know that’s bollocks.”

    If an “artist” had done a half-baked version of Biffa Bacon and put it up at the ICA, the arts establishment would have been churning out big words about it.

    This just typifies their attitude:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/1044375.stm

    Painting on a sci-fi book? No-one cares. Rip it off and put it in a gallery? Art.

  4. Arts graduates can be perfectly comfortable with numbers on condition that they grew up in a period when mental arithmetic was still promoted and prized.

    Old money, imperial measures and slide rules rather than calculators were aspects of primary education rather than A-Level and beyond.

  5. But money comparisons with the 16th century do quickly become nonsense.
    What was the price of a pot noodle or an iPad back then?

  6. The Stigler – I have to admire that man’s chutzpah. Nick a composition from an old sci fi novel cover, paint it on a huge canvas, and then get nominated for prestigious awards.

    Plus, it’s better art than unmade beds or preserved meat.

    The picture they used in the Guardian, if it matched the caption they put under it, would make it one of the most remarkable and famous finds in the history of art.

    Sadly, it is very obviously not a 16th century painting of Shakespeare. Cos, among other reasons, there aren’t any confirmed pictures of him done during his lifetime, and the handful of possibly authentic portraits of the Bard look nothing like the image the Guardian shows.

    The Guardian’s caption is a bit like claiming to have a first edition copy of the New Testament autographed by Jesus… but only mentioning it in passing to illustrate a boring story about Joseph’s carpentry business.

    Arts grads, eh?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *