« who says it's an easy target? | Main | more human than the human »

March 31, 2005



I found the WSJ's hatchet job against the October gang's book more perversely entertaining.


That WSJ piece goes along rather sedately for most of it, hitting all the major anti-Theory points—deriding Duchamp's stature, quoting the goofball "jargon," protesting the insidious Marxist underpinning. (I think Gibson should have a chat with Roger Kimball, however, as regards the so-called "mainstreaming of postmodernism"; hopefully the Rog can set him straight to the fact that hegemonic postmoderism is already a preeminent corrupting influence in society.)

It pulls off the gloves, though, and just unhinges in the final paragraph:

It's appalling to think that a book like this may enter classrooms and inflict itself on young minds with little or no acquaintance with art history. So I have a suggestion for parents of high-school students: Find out whether the college that your child hopes to attend plans to assign "Art Since 1900" in its art-history courses. If so, apply elsewhere.

Practical advise, that.


err, "practical advice"

Mark Westphal

I'm wondering if anybody from this blog actually went to this "evil" conference. While I hate to admit it, given my critcism of the event before it ever happened, I found it to be an exciting and well rounded day. Cisneros clearly was capitalizing on the tradition of futurist assembly, or the Stravinsky effect as we experienced with Boyd's performance. This was a freshening of situationist imperitives that should be encouraged given the "limits" of colloquia. Ron Jones delivered an impressive presentation and Jodi Dean had her politics buttoned down. Did anybody go? There were about 400 people in there for 6 hours straight. I may all have some problems with this whole thing.... but thats impressive.


Well, there is only one person at this site, and I didn't go. Even if I had been inclined (which I wasn't), I only learned of it a week before it happened and already had other committments. I had some misgivings about posting about it given that I knew I wouldn't be there, and tried to build those into my posts at least a bit even as I mocked the event.

It's hard for me to respond further to your comment, as without having been there I'm not in a position to agree or disagree with your assessment. But while I'm sure my opinions would have been modified to some degree if I had gone, I doubt they would have changed all that much.

The comments to this entry are closed.

From the Bookshelves


  • Send email to modkicks at yahoo dot com