Critique Of Rhetorical Analysis Of The Essay By Max Nordau

Max Nordau creates an well written and interesting essay asking the question: what makes art appealing? What is considered beautiful, and what is considered heinous?
At the beginning of his essay, Nordau states strongly that people who make controversial and offensive art should be treated the same way as drunks, criminals, and the mentally ill are treated. He declares that "the artist who complacently represents what is reprehensible, vicious, criminal, or approves of it, perhaps glorifies it, differs not in kind, but only in degree, from the criminal who actually commits it".
Nordau continues the essay comparing and contrasting important aspects of art. The whole essay is almost like a well written thought process. Max tries to create a
At first he seems to reject the idea, but he goes in depth with what Esthetes could mean, and seems to convince himself that art can be both immoral and beautiful, something he thought was not possible at the beginning at the essay.
He explains that there are two different types of beauty: sensual and intellectual, and while sensual beauty is important, it is also shallow. We can use our senses in every day life.
But, intellectual beauty is something on a completely different level. Intellectual beauty is simultaneously needing your mind to be open, and opening your mind.
So he revises his statement that all work that contains unethical material is wrong.
Nordau gives the example of a painting by the artist Valdez. The subject is barbaric and vulgar, and yet, with a fresh perspective, Nordau argues that it is a truly beautiful art piece. Sensual beauty is not what art is always about. If you have an open mind, you can experience the intellectual beauty in almost every art piece. Nordau explains that you can feel the raw emotion of the painting, and maybe that is exquisite enough, all on its