Scan barcode
barborak42's review against another edition
2.0
This book is so elitist I cannot but laugh at all the arguments. It was written for middle/upper-classmen who cannot get over the fact there is more to art than renaissance nudes, and fail to understand that all art is political.
themorsecode's review against another edition
3.0
Short polemic on identity politics in Art, makes some interesting points but he's often a little careful in the examples he chooses. Enjoyed his criticism of the quasi-intellectual language used by a lot of artists/writers that obscures often straightforward points.
batbones's review against another edition
5.0
Last book to be finished as the year ends and I'm glad for it. It articulates a viable and elaborate response to the ulta-politicisation of art and the reduction of all art to the hip-and-happening buzzwords of 'politicisation' and 'transgression' and 'subversion'. Their dominance is palpable and observable (just compare the Tate Modern to, say, any art gallery displaying paintings up till the 1900s). I love how this collection of short arguments is described by its publisher Bite Back as a series of polemics; it is very thought-provoking, and puts it better in words any incipient second thoughts I have been having lately about the state of modern art and the worth of art and criticism. What is art and its relation to beauty? What is it modern art and their capitalisation on shock value until the knife edge is dulled? This slim volume echoes similar thoughts first introduced to me by the philosopher Roger Scruton on the current denigration of the worth of beauty, as reflected in architectural styles and modern art themes, and art critic Camille Paglia, on the contemporary mutilation of high/classical art and its mythological nudes by force-fitting them into the postmodern lenses of power dynamics and feminist theory. Why is art ultimately a matter of power? Should it be? What are other counter perspectives to current mainstream so-called 'subversive' thinking? The chapters are very clearly laid out, the reasons cogent. Ahmari's account of what it's like in the art world today a bit laborious and embarrassing to read, but a needful dip into obscurantism that plagues critical writing. He gives the reader substantial reasons to reject the contemporary approach and rethink the purpose of art and return and renew other dimensions of artistic pleasure into the spectator's encounter. The cover art, I think, deserves a special mention - people watching/looking at old paintings is an enduring affirmation of the lasting power, allure and enchantment of the old masters' handiwork. Why do their names endure, and their works continue to draw hundreds of thousands? May they live on.
scottacorbin's review against another edition
3.0
A fascinating exploration of the rot in contemporary art, showcasing how politics is downstream of culture.
obscurereads's review against another edition
5.0
Sohrab Ahmari hits the nail on the head with this short polemic. The hard-left bourgeois in the arts and academia have encouraged and fostered the balkanisation of western nations through their dogmatic oikophobia, which they routinely pass off as "intellectualism".
aemowers's review against another edition
4.0
Bright and challenging. I appreciate his approach to gender politics, but had difficulty with his regard to race relations. Regardless, it’s a worthwhile read, and I’ll be pondering it for awhile.
exaggeratedfragility's review
1.0
I picked this up to try to get a better understanding of a view opposing mine.
Barely a coherent argument against so-called "identitarian" art and culture. It sounded like every other guy I've ever heard condemning "snowflakes," but in book (pamphlet?) form.
Barely a coherent argument against so-called "identitarian" art and culture. It sounded like every other guy I've ever heard condemning "snowflakes," but in book (pamphlet?) form.
More...