Scan barcode
dkrane's review against another edition
3.0
A frequently fascinating book I’m very grateful to have read for its exposure to a broad range of art and artists. At times reads more like a catalogue of violent art than a larger argument and if there are easy takeaways from Nelson’s musings, I’m not sure what they are, except for people being mysterious animals, sometimes cruel; that certain artists are particularly cruel (in ways that can be generative); and that cruel art need not (and in fact often does not) Expose the Truth to still have value. Love and Art need not inherently go hand in hand.
nualasiobhan333's review against another edition
challenging
medium-paced
4.0
i enjoyed this. it was hard to get through at times, the descriptions of such cruelties
jannyslibrary's review against another edition
5.0
This book was referenced in Elisa Gabbert’s phenomenon collection “The Unreality of Memory” (I’m still thinking about it!!) and so I had to read this (and this one has me adding even more to my TBR - it just goes on and on)
gregbrown's review against another edition
2.0
Disappointing.
Despite pursuing multiple avenues to explore cruelty in art, seems to sidestep basic issues of what counts as consent (and whether a thing really is possible for some acts). Instead we get a muddled, piece-wise groping against it as Nelson again runs into it on a case-by-case basis.
When you're simulating cruelty on film, what are the bounds for when it becomes immorally real to the actors? The audience? At what point are we just doing crime or aggression and coating it in a veneer of "art," like the cited case of one artist taking a TV host hostage as an artistic statement?
It also falls into he trap of favoring the avant-garde because it takes an arty stance and is designed to generate art discourse around the piece, even when the text itself is less rich than most "lower art." For example, while she refers to it glancingly in one paragraph, the Jackass films alone are richer texts than most of the stuff she discusses here, and more capable of mining our collective responses! Or devoting paragraphs to a kaleidoscopic art film called "I-Be Area" when Tim & Eric Awesome Show, Great Job! is tackling a similar aesthetic to much more sprawling ends.
Nelson is a good writer and the material varied enough that it isn't a total disaster, but woof.
Despite pursuing multiple avenues to explore cruelty in art, seems to sidestep basic issues of what counts as consent (and whether a thing really is possible for some acts). Instead we get a muddled, piece-wise groping against it as Nelson again runs into it on a case-by-case basis.
When you're simulating cruelty on film, what are the bounds for when it becomes immorally real to the actors? The audience? At what point are we just doing crime or aggression and coating it in a veneer of "art," like the cited case of one artist taking a TV host hostage as an artistic statement?
It also falls into he trap of favoring the avant-garde because it takes an arty stance and is designed to generate art discourse around the piece, even when the text itself is less rich than most "lower art." For example, while she refers to it glancingly in one paragraph, the Jackass films alone are richer texts than most of the stuff she discusses here, and more capable of mining our collective responses! Or devoting paragraphs to a kaleidoscopic art film called "I-Be Area" when Tim & Eric Awesome Show, Great Job! is tackling a similar aesthetic to much more sprawling ends.
Nelson is a good writer and the material varied enough that it isn't a total disaster, but woof.
kailas's review against another edition
challenging
dark
hopeful
informative
inspiring
reflective
tense
5.0
piper_sh's review against another edition
3.0
Maggie Nelson makes some very interesting and valid points.
None of them however surprising - Humanity really is an abyss.
None of them however surprising - Humanity really is an abyss.