Comments on: The Fake’s Progress

By: sandy sottilare

sandy sottilare — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 14:15:22 +0000

Dandyism is simply a cultural art form centered upon the human frame and individualized through one’s theatrical proclivities.

By: Monty

Monty — Fri, 25 Jun 2010 10:59:19 +0000

Dears like it or not he was noticed and looked at with sideway glances as we passed unnoticed. We may not agree if he played a role, we still talk about Sebastian. We Will aspire. M

By: Ghion

Ghion — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 19:04:12 +0000

How will history rate Horsley?

Dandyism => Dandyesque

By: Bricology

Bricology — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 23:59:40 +0000

T. Gentry wrote “If anything, a dandy is supposed to be an original of some sort.”

Careful what you suggest, son — that would disqualify most people here.

By: T. Gentry

T. Gentry — Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:38:42 +0000

Horsley = horseshit.

If anything, a dandy is supposed to be an original of some sort.
Horseshit constantly rips off others–usually Oscar Wilde, but in the title of his useless volume,
Marc Bohan instead.

Just a poseur getting away with it for a while.

By: M

Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:30:07 +0000

“From the moment that art ceases to be the nourishment of the best brains, the artist can use all the tricks of the intellectual charlatan. The refined people, the rich ones and the professional layabouts, only want what is sensational or scandalous in modern art. And since the days of Cubism I have fed these boys what they wanted and pacified the critics with all the idiotic ideas that went through my head. Whilst I amused myself with all these pranks, I became famous and very rich. I am just a public clown, a fair- ground barker. It is painful for me to confess this, but in the end it pays to be honest.” — Pablo Picasso

By: JES

JES — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 03:55:42 +0000

Quote Nick Willard: “He still dresses with the subtlety of an elephant’s prick.” heeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!

yeah, I’d rather party with with Horsely.

By: Christian

Christian — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 00:07:16 +0000

That’s a very revealing thread on W’s blog. He seems to all but admit that he may be prone to spouting what in hindsight he realizes is nonsense, and comes up with a convenient excuse that he shouldn’t be held accountable for ideas expressed more than 90 days ago:

“No contradiction at all, from my point of view. Besides, the idea of being fossilized by whatever one has written in the past does not appeal to anyone, least of all myself.”

By: M

Tue, 13 Nov 2007 16:28:22 +0000

Of the two I’d give Horsley a trifle the preference. I mean, who would you rather have at a party, the fellow with all the ribald stories and a fist full of fun pills or the guy declaiming about moths and who thinks “Dandies identify strongly with plants?”

By: Nick Willard

Nick Willard — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 10:08:17 +0000

The Infected Provincial has gotten on the Horsley bandwagon.

In the comments, he indirectly replies to M2’s brilliant skewering. I say “indirectly” because, as he has told us so many times, he doesn’t read D.net, don’t you know.

As he has for some time (after he realized that he was losing the war), he who once marketed himself as a dandy now dismisses dandyism as uninteresting. This “philosophical” geological shift mirrors his sartorial passage from leprechaun impersonator to one who dresses more conventionally but equally tastelessly. He still dresses with the subtlety of an elephant’s prick.

Irony of ironies: he labels as “vulgar” anything that has “an element of predictable schtick.” Look in the mirror.

He is a mote in the public eye.