Rating: 
Summary: Outing the world of modern art
Review: In his own inimitable style Wolfe offers, to the uninitiated, a Modern American Art World primer. He traces the progress from Realism to Minimalism, with stops along the way. He focuses on the relationship between the theorists ( Greenberg, Rosenberg, Scull, et al. ) and the painters themselves. His wit, his irony, and his keen insights make for an amusing read; but, for me, starting from ground zero, it was a learning experience.
Rating: 
Summary: A full-frontal assault on degenerate American "art."
Review: Th is book skewers the mavens of the American artistic establishment, particularly during the 1960s and early 70s. Wolfe is devastating in his criticism of the trendiness and ugliness masquerading as ersatz social rebellion which has largely (and sadly) come to replace authentic American art based on esthetic beauty. My only major complaint against this work is that I do very much wish Wolfe would release an updated version of it! The multicultural, politically correct "art" of the 1980s, for example, does not deserve to evade Wolfe's witty pastings merely by virtue of having been produced too late
Rating:
Summary: Artistis and Aristocrats are Amply, Ably Abused
Review: The Painted Word is part of a pleasant little triptych of social commentary produced by Tom Wolfe in the 70s (more or less) of which Radical Chic and From Bauhaus to Our House make up the other titles. Even with lots of pictures, whitespace and margin, Painted Word only runs to 99 pages. I bought all three and read them over the course of a weekend, what with travel time and all.Tom Wolfe very devastatingly takes a prominent Modern Art critic's unwittingly accurate sentence and elaborates it into a social, cultural and intellectual critique of the prentensions and foibles of this tiny self-referntial world. This is a send-up, a satire, and a de-bunking. And a field for which such a come-uppance, if not long overdue, was at the least fully due for just this particular sort of biting insightful up-comeance. Wolfe takes us through the motives and psychological drama of the three actors in this story - the Artist, the Patron, and the Critic. The Artist has undergone a change as his role evolved from the glorification of the royals in the Old World to the affliction of the middle class in the New: "The modern picture of The Artist began to form: the poor but free spirit, plebian but aspiring only to be classless, to cut himself forever free from the bonds of the greedy and hypocritical bourgeoisie, to be whatever the fat burghers feared most, to cross the line wherever they drew it, to look at the world in a way they couldn't see, to be high, live low, stay young forever - in short, to be the bohemian." It is ultimately up to Warhol, of course, to perfect this stance Warholicly: "Warhol learned fast, however, and he soon knew how to take whatever he wanted. The bohemian, by definition, was one who did things the bourgeois didn't dare do. True enough, said Warhol, and he added an inspired refinement: nothing is more bourgeois than to be afraid to look bourgeois. True to his theory, he now goes about in button-down shirts, striped ties, and ill-cut tweed jackets, like a 1952 Holy Cross pre-med student." In the meantime, the idle, inherited rich have to cleanse their money: "That is why collecting contemporary art, the leading edge, the latest thing, warm and wet from the Loft, appeals specifically to those who feel most uneasy about their own commercial wealth." Yet they nonetheless, being humans and not theory processing machines, do find themselves drawn to things they can actually understand: "We may it as a principle at this point that collectors of contemporary art do not want to buy highly abstract art unless it's the only game in town. They will always prefer realistic art instead - as long as someone in authority assures them that it is (a) new, and (b) not realistic" This is Wolfe, not at his finest, for there is a certain sort of botanist's plodding categorization of the ecosystem at work here, but nonetheless at his sparkling-intermittent-burst best. The art 'warm and wet from the Loft' is a delicious turn of phrase in so many ways and will be my favorite keepsake from this work. As for the Critic, that is Wolfe's primary topic in this piece, and, being a short piece, I won't ruin or summarize it for you. He does end with a bold prediction for the Year 2000, so you do have something to look forward to. This book is a good buy for Tom Wolfe lovers, modern art skeptics and free-thinkers, and the social and cultural commentariat. It's a bit less broad in its appeal than Wolfe's other works, including Radical Chic, so peruse the "Look Inside" pages first to make sure you like the style.
Rating:
Summary: Brilliant
Review: This book is Tom Wolfe pointing and shouting "The Emperor has no clothes!!" He explains how splattered canvases by Jackson Pollock and Frank Stella could be called works of genius. It's the history of how people can be suckered into believing anything if it adds to their level of status in the world. Wolfe wrote a book like this about the world of architecture titled FROM BAUHAUS TO OUR HOUSE. It is equally great, and you should not read one without reading the other. You'll understand your world a lot better after reading both of them.
Rating:
Summary: ONLY TOM WOLF COULD MANAGE TO MAKE MARXISM SO FUN
Review: This book makes a scathing review of the art world of the 20th century, and in the process takes you on an amazing romp through what Wolf calls the "boho dance"-- the codependence of the bourgeois, establishment culture of collectors and the bohemian avant-garde. Wolf is ahead of his time-- and even ahead of himself-- with this book. It could have been, of course, and deserved to be, a lengthy, dry, scholarly theoretical text-- but only Tom Wolf coulda make it a 100 page, easily accessable, and yet undeniably brilliant work of social fashion-crit. Smashing!
Rating:
Summary: You can also have an opinion
Review: This great book establishes a solid link between what you always suspected about the artworld and its true "behaviour" . It is essential reading if you want to feel more comfortable simply enjoying art and not having to supply the usual adjectives to it.
Rating: 
Summary: Come And Get Me!
Review: This short tract of a book sets out a single, streamlined argument: that twentieth-century art is really a series of art theories (such as Abstract Expressionism or Pop Art) as illustrated by certain works responsive to these theories: the theory, crucially, preceded and influenced - rather than reacted to - artistic experminent. Wolfe singles out Clement Greenberg, Harold Rosenberg and Leo Steinberg - critics rather artists themselves - who in this way exerted the real shaping influence on the development of art in the last century. How? Simply by determining the tastes of the purveying 'culturati' and thus the activites of the artists they patronized. The simplicity of the argument is both its strength and weakness. Strength because it facilitates a brisk, exclamatory, copious prose style capable of persuasive-seeming overviews. Weakness because potential objections and qualifications are skimmed over in silence. However, this is a popular polemic, not an academic treatise, and in this capacity it works extremely well: its basic premise is strong enough in itself not to look shaky and it is delivered with wit, panache and infectious enthusiasm. Successfully provocative.
Rating:
Summary: Come And Get Me!
Review: This short tract of a book sets out a single, streamlined argument: that twentieth-century art is really a series of art theories (such as Abstract Expressionism or Pop Art) as illustrated by certain works responsive to these theories: the theory, crucially, preceded and influenced - rather than reacted to - artistic experminent. Wolfe singles out Clement Greenberg, Harold Rosenberg and Leo Steinberg - critics rather artists themselves - who in this way exerted the real shaping influence on the development of art in the last century. How? Simply by determining the tastes of the purveying 'culturati' and thus the activites of the artists they patronized. The simplicity of the argument is both its strength and weakness. Strength because it facilitates a brisk, exclamatory, copious prose style capable of persuasive-seeming overviews. Weakness because potential objections and qualifications are skimmed over in silence. However, this is a popular polemic, not an academic treatise, and in this capacity it works extremely well: its basic premise is strong enough in itself not to look shaky and it is delivered with wit, panache and infectious enthusiasm. Successfully provocative.
Rating:
Summary: I don't know what art is, but I know what I am told to like.
Review: Tom Wolfe is the master of cunning expose. With history and humor he describes the New York City Art scene in the 1960s. The politics and posturing of art figures trying to "legitimize" their art philosophy was ripe with hilarity. Art itself was secondary to the press agent. Guru's would write art credos and then hunt down bohemians to fit the bill. Guru's would fight among themselves the real definition of Art. The more outlandish, the more embraced. The art that stirs emotion, brings pleasure, or tells a universal truth will stand the test of time. I've seen the Jackson Pollack documentary and understand that it took a certain skill to produce his many works, but do you want #27 hanging on your wall in the den?
Rating:
Summary: A Hilarious Lampoon of the New York 'Schools' of Art
Review: Tom Wolfe turns his caustic wit and pen to the world of art in this social essay. Specifically here he deals with the New York Schools of Abstract Impressionism, Pop Art and Abstract Expressionism. He reviews the scholarly dissertations and criticism.. the deep and passionate evocation of the intended meanings by painters and their champions.. the social context and views of the public.. and has come to the conclusion.. that it's all about.. promotion.. SELF Promotion. There is always a lot of tongue in cheek truth in a Tom Wolfe work. A nod and a wink that these guys set themselves up for it. But it's easy to lampoon a collection of hard drinking painters who have come to the profound revelation that the guiding principle to all art is that it should be FLAT. The Flatter the better, judged as to its achievement of Flatness. Or a now famous article (in the art world) in which a scholar decided that objects you found on your supermarket shelf were in fact the cultures noblest expression of itself, igniting a fierce struggle for supremacy with its predecessor. I like Pollock, Johns, Liechtenstein and Warhol.. I don't try to understand them. Their aesthetic qualities speak for themselves. But when the hangers on and speculators on 'trends' start lauding ugliness as being a virtue, or as a characteristic perceived only by the untrained eye, things start to get a bit absurd. This funny little (art) treasure.. usually found in some garage these days.. is Totally Charming.
|
