Why political art sucks

[wombat_socho]

Ed Driscoll reminds me about a guest post by Fernando Teson last week at the Volokh Conspiracy that argued that all political art should be regarded as a failure of discourse. For this he was pilloried by a gang of nitpicking commenters, who made /b/ look like a bunch of Oxford Debate Union members by comparison. (I kept expecting to see "NO U!" break out at any minute.) Teson's basic argument is that political art speaks to emotions, not reason, and therefore makes any discussion futile, but you should RTWT. It's a more elegant argument than me sitting here typing "Polemic sucks".