Fuck yeah. One wonders how much of the effect is due to the evocative names he gives many of his paintings.
The fact that I've only read the first thirty-odd pages no doubt means that this is premature in many ways, but I'm pretty certain that the biggest flaw with Johanna Drucker's Sweet Dreams is her unexplained and unjustified assumption (which one might have thought would be called into question precisely by her arguments in nearby arenas) that there is such a thing as fine art.
The biggest flaw in Johanna Drucker's book is that she is a terrible writer. Of course that makes her perfect to write about art. Or is there something about art that turns people into terrible writers? The critics who get books all seem like tedious old beatniks or self-swallowing post-modernist bores. Except Peter Scheldahl. So far.
Oh, and Peter Wollen is okay.
Posted by: mcmc | January 19, 2008 at 05:45 PM
Of course that makes her perfect to
write about artbe an academic.Posted by: ben wolfson | January 19, 2008 at 05:49 PM