Scan barcode
tmatysik's review against another edition
challenging
funny
informative
reflective
medium-paced
3.75
dsullivan's review against another edition
2.0
"...those of us who believe in Advancement don't unquestioningly embrace our idols, they have to earn our respect first. And once that is earned, we don't just abandon the relationship when they do something we don't understand, we try to understand it."
The theory is that when an artistic genius alienates their fan-base and is considered "past their prime," the truth may be that they are actually ahead of their time and still producing quality work. The two strongest cases given for this theory are Bob Dylan and Lou Reed. If that means nothing to you, then this book is probably not for you. I'd recommend it to someone in their late 30s to early 50s that is a big fan of pop culture.
The theory is that when an artistic genius alienates their fan-base and is considered "past their prime," the truth may be that they are actually ahead of their time and still producing quality work. The two strongest cases given for this theory are Bob Dylan and Lou Reed. If that means nothing to you, then this book is probably not for you. I'd recommend it to someone in their late 30s to early 50s that is a big fan of pop culture.
gregoryscottdilcox's review against another edition
4.0
Great read that has left me thinking differently about art and artist, especially what is and isn't good. If you like amusing pop culture theories give the book a try.
peregrineace's review
2.0
This was a tough book to read as I was very interested in a theory that purported to examine why geniuses often do things which are confusing to the public at large. Unfortunately, it's one long opinion on who the most Advanced (author's capitalization) artists of recent generations are, mostly focusing on rock and roll musicians. Hartley is dismissive of critics (though he is one) and his criteria for Advancement, muddily explained early, often fails as his actual criteria for Advancing someone. His "theory" can't be used to make predictions (even within his selections!), which means it fails a basic tenet of scientific philosophy.
Although Hartley's obvious interest/knowledge centers on rock artists, he ventures into other areas, such as fine arts and politics. The author himself sums it up best, saying "I'll stick to just a few that I feel strongly about, knowing well that there will be somebody who knows more than I do who can demolish everything I write." One wonders, if he knows this, why he bothered to write the book at all, as it suffers greatly from its lack of inclusiveness.
I could go into a long explanation of the logical errors he makes. Suffice to say, this is NOT a book for those familiar with Giftedness, twice exceptional Giftedness, Occam's Razor, intersectionality, confirmation bias, the backfire effect, congruence bias, outcome bias, and several other common biases that people (understandably) present when they don't examine their own "evidence" for fallacies or alternate explanations. My reading progress log gives some specifics.
One problem I must mention: the whole book (and opinion-theory) is terribly misogynistic. Hartley claims that women "don't aspire to Advancement" without providing any evidence whatsoever. First, one must have a better definition of a principle to aspire to it; and secondly, it's more likely that he didn't look at enough evidence than that 50% of the population simply doesn't fit his opinion. As if that wasn't enough, there are numerous comments throughout the book dismissing the morally corrupt behavior of many of these male examples, much of it with women (and sometimes girls) as victims. Objectifying and stereotyping half the population doesn't sound "Advanced" to me.
Towards the end of the book, Hartley states "your believing the Theory makes it true." I think it's pure opinion with pseudo-scientific support; based on the lack of evidence presented, so does the author. This topic should have been confined to his blog until it matured through some serious devotion to research and bias examination. Not recommended.
(I received this book for free through the Goodreads First Reads program. The opinions expressed are my own.)
Although Hartley's obvious interest/knowledge centers on rock artists, he ventures into other areas, such as fine arts and politics. The author himself sums it up best, saying "I'll stick to just a few that I feel strongly about, knowing well that there will be somebody who knows more than I do who can demolish everything I write." One wonders, if he knows this, why he bothered to write the book at all, as it suffers greatly from its lack of inclusiveness.
I could go into a long explanation of the logical errors he makes. Suffice to say, this is NOT a book for those familiar with Giftedness, twice exceptional Giftedness, Occam's Razor, intersectionality, confirmation bias, the backfire effect, congruence bias, outcome bias, and several other common biases that people (understandably) present when they don't examine their own "evidence" for fallacies or alternate explanations. My reading progress log gives some specifics.
One problem I must mention: the whole book (and opinion-theory) is terribly misogynistic. Hartley claims that women "don't aspire to Advancement" without providing any evidence whatsoever. First, one must have a better definition of a principle to aspire to it; and secondly, it's more likely that he didn't look at enough evidence than that 50% of the population simply doesn't fit his opinion. As if that wasn't enough, there are numerous comments throughout the book dismissing the morally corrupt behavior of many of these male examples, much of it with women (and sometimes girls) as victims. Objectifying and stereotyping half the population doesn't sound "Advanced" to me.
Towards the end of the book, Hartley states "your believing the Theory makes it true." I think it's pure opinion with pseudo-scientific support; based on the lack of evidence presented, so does the author. This topic should have been confined to his blog until it matured through some serious devotion to research and bias examination. Not recommended.
(I received this book for free through the Goodreads First Reads program. The opinions expressed are my own.)
kimballb's review
1.0
The author excludes women from his theory with the exception of two where on the bubble of being advanced. In all other places, women were either trivial supports for men or completely ignored in the following realms: stage, screen, writers, fine artists, & sports. The author uses the ignorance excuse for music (advancement might be just more of a male thing), but he fails to give any excuses for why women were not considered in the other realms. As such, his theory is flawed and incomplete.
More...