I was just idly looking at stuff on Amazon when I remembered a book that my tutor on the ill-fated pgce recommended to us. It’s called ‘Rape of the Masters: How Political Correctness Sabotaged Art’, written by one Roger Kimball. Take a look at this man, he’s wearing a bow tie for fucks sake. Kimball is a conservative U.S. art critic, essayist, and social commentator whose book purports to ‘expose the charlatanry that fuels much academic art history today and leaks into the art world generally’. Amazing. I didn’t think you could really be a conservative art historian; you certainly can’t be a conservative art theorist! Still more amazing, when you look further down the authors list of publications, you see one entitled ‘Darwinian Fairytales: Selfish Genes, Errors of Heredity, and Other Fables of Evolution’ for which he was the editor. The tutor in question was much enamoured with his purchase of this book, and I am reminded again of what a confused and reactionary tosser he was. I mean, the man in charge of The University of ******’s art teacher training program is enthralled by the work of a right wing neo-creationist art ‘commentator’, and nobody, apart from me, seems particularly bothered with this. Not that I’m bitter mind, he’ll make a great character for my novel. The dogmatic and reactionary art teacher, who thought of drawing as a quasi-religious system of enlightenment. He had the most strange way of clearing his throat after every few turgid and monotonous utterances, more in the top of his mouth than in his throat, so it came out sounding like small mammal in distress. And, I think he may have been impotent. Ooh, is that going a bit too far maybe? It would explain a lot. Both Rudyard Kipling and Kingsley Amis took revenge on old University Professors they had taken a disliking to by making thinly veiled characters of them in their work. I can dream can’t I?