Rating: 
Summary: The perspective from the middle of the road
Review: I do not necessarily see the fact that Shlain is neither an artist or a physicist as a problem. Rather it is probably apt that this topic be addressed without the prejudices that would (intentionally or unintentionally) be applied by an "expert" in either field. Neither subject can be easily understood by someone from the outside. To draw parallels between the two fields is a herculean effort that I congratulate Shlain for attempting. It is an effort that needed to be made. I think that any book should be approached with the mindset that the author may be mistaken about some of his ideas and "facts". Even in depth research is based on the reading of information put forth by other human beings capable of errors in judgement and having their own prejudices and hidden agendas. If there are some things that are incorrect about Shlain's interpretation of physics or art (there are), this does not undermine the importance of the direction a mind takes if it is willing to put the two words together (Art and Physics) and open itself to the possibility of parallels. Advances in any field sometimes depend heavily on previous theories that are proven incorrect. In other words, we move forward by knowing which direction NOT to take. (Many scientists and artists can attest to this.)In fact...it is almost inevitable that some parallels do exist. Which is why it was important that someone attempt to formulate them. The development of both science and art are a reflection of the history of humankind -- in this book the development of (western) thought. The right-brained thinker and the left-brained thinker are both thinkers of a human nature, not one or the other is necessarily right. The seminal value of this book is almost simplistically to be weighted in the title alone with the idea of parallels in two seemingly disparate fields. It is less simplistically, a book that SHOULD be read. In what is basically an admittedly surface treatment of the history of physics and the history of art, Shlain calls to mind the possibility of the importance of scientific thinking to the artist, creative thinking to the scientist and the importance of both to the layman. Yes, science is methodical in nature and art seems the opposite, but if understood, Shlain shows a method to the development of Art through the tracing of its history in reference to Physics. His conclusions about art ideas leading physics ideas at least chronologically are situationally interpretative and in the end (as with any book), only his opinion. However intuitively, I believe that it would not be entirely incorrect to state that on an individual level the creative idea (art) happens in a flash without complete understanding only to be proved as feasible by methodical investigation (science), therefore this could be extrapolated to be true on a societal (historical) level. To dispute this conclusion would only be accomplished by doing something I believe is a necessity anyway -- deeper investigation of different fields of thinking within a historical context. An investigation that this book does a good job of beginning.
Rating: 
Summary: A Big Disappointment
Review: I found this book in the physics section of the bookstore and was completely psyched. I'm all over this stuff. I checked it out from the library and dove right in. His thesis, which is that all major innovations in the physics realm were preceded by those in art, excited and intrigued me. After reading his first supportive example, which was weak and loosely-woven, I felt slightly disheartened, but I remained hopeful. After the second and the third, I began to feel very let down. Mr. Shlain's biggest problem is that he is approximate. He's a master of haziness and doesn't seem to really understand art or physics to any depth. He skims the surface of both topics and attempts to fuse them, hoping, I suppose, his readers will possess a similarly shallow grasp of the subjects. I learned nothing about art history, nothing about physics, and I had to doubt the couple of things I did learn because he was so off-base otherwise. I stopped this book halfway through, which I hate doing. But I couldn't go on any longer without feeling I was wasting my time. He's sort of on the right track, but his shoes are untied.
Rating:
Summary: Poorly written and poorly understood twaddle
Review: I have nothing but respect for someone who learns enough art and enough physics to write a proper book on the topic. Unfortunately, this author has not done so.
Put simply, this text contain information that is downright misleading. Physics can be quite difficult, especially if one is trying to understand the esoteric worlds of relativity and modern (quantum) physics. That said, there is no excuse for misleading a reader, when an educated layman's understanding of physics would reveal correct and useful information.
Dr Shlain states several things that would mislead a lay reader. For example, his understanding of the way lights add is just plain wrong. This might not harm a painter, but would harm a digital artist or someone building light sculptures. Were said painter to think that their flawed understanding was supported by relativity, they would resist learning how lights differ from pigments, making it very hard to move to interior design or other light-based domains.
This complete failure to get the physics even close to correct makes me worry about the art history. Again, he does not have to be an expert, but proper due diligence would suggest sending the drafts to a working art historian and a working physicist to get their feedback before inficting it on the general public.
Again, I am not claiming that one needs graduate level work to write such a book. I do claim that one should have at least an educated layman's exposure to the feilds before taking pen in hand.
Rating:
Summary: A Refreshing Tour of Physics by an Author Who Speaks Art
Review: I just finished Art & Physics in a passionate burst yesterday, enjoying the last four chapters greatly. What a wonderful journey through space, time, and light. I purchased the book on 3/12/99 and finished it on 6/03/99; this is the peril of having only weekend time for study, but this book has been a grand companion to my weekends. And, lovely serendipity, in the very middle of it, my company sent me to Holland, and at the Reichsmuseum, I saw the Van Goghs, Matisse, Monet, Pisarro, and Picasso...all of them now linked to speeding trains and clock towers in my mind. After the other physics books I'd tackled, "Art and Physics" was like reading a book written by someone bi-lingual, and one of the languages was mine, so it helped me to feel more nimble in the other tongue.
Rating:
Summary: Great Topic, Poor Product
Review: I loved the idea of the book so much I couldn't wait to get it home from the bookstore. But like other reviewers the treatment of physics and art quickly eroded my esteem for the book. But what frustrated me the most was how any and every theme in art that Shlain happens across can do nothing but prove his thesis: An artist paints something completely still and it represents time near the speed of light, another something that moves and it represents something else at the speed of light, an artist paints elongated forms and the same thing, shortened forms and you get length contraction. In short, there isn't anything artists COULD HAVE painted that Shlain couldn't have somehow connected to relativity of quantum theory. The book remains curiously novel, and it earns it's one star if only because I like it when people explain art to me so I can understand it. But no doubt there are better sources for that.
Rating:
Summary: Marvelous
Review: I've read a lot of books in my life. This is probably the best. The juxtaposition of generally exclusive topics - physics and art - is enough to put this work near the top on anyone's list. That it does it so well, and so meticulously, sends it to the head of the list. Schlain's exploration of the parallels between mankind's expanding understanding of the physical world and the concurrent changes in styles of physical art is gripping. I'm sure there are some flaws in his facts, but these pale in comparison to his monumental achievement in this work. I had a fair understanding of physics before starting the book and finished it better informed. At the same time, my admittedly weak knowledge of art history was more than supplemented. His explanation for the congruence he recounts is compelling, but he doesn't force it down the reader's throat. Rather, in a manner that is all too rare these days, Schlain presents the evidence, draws his conclusions and modestly leaves the reader to decide if the two match up. That I already subscribed to the explanation before I read the book may bias my opinion somewhat, but I must say that the conclusion is not the book's justification. Too many books are the opposite: They depend completely on the validity of thin insights and, so, end up padded with reams of extra pages drawing spurious connections to weak facts (apparently in the mistaken belief that repetition will bolster weak associations). By contrast, Schlain's conclusion appears as more of an afterthought. Here, the central insight is in the parallels recounted, not the conclusions to be draw therefrom. And the book makes a solid case for the existence of these parallels, notwithstanding the odd factual error. Read this book. You'll learn a lot, even if you're already familiar with one subject or the other, and your thinking about the world will be shaken up a bit.
Rating:
Summary: An entertaining read that makes you think...
Review: If you're looking for a hardcore physics textbook, go elsewhere. If you're looking for a hardcore art textbook, go elsewhere. Mr. Shlain is not trying to impress you with infinite depth of knowledge in the field of physics nor art. Instead, he suggests that from often unrelated fields there exists an emergence of similar conceptual breakthroughs throughout history. This book is an attempt at making the sociological bridge between art and physics, and provides examples to further this suggestion.
Rating:
Summary: The Best Book I've Ever Read
Review: In 30 years I've read something along the lines of 3000 books - everything from Shakespeare to pulp Star Trek novels. This one is the single best book I've ever read. I came to the book with a pretty good layman's understanding of physics and was better informed when I finished it. Meanwhile, my meager knowledge of art history was expanded dramatically. This is a book with something for both the left and right sides of your brain. What more could you ask for?
Rating:
Summary: Physics Phobia Cureall
Review: In my field (coaching) you have to know a lot and I'm always trying to expand my sphere of knowledge. This book put me light years ahead and is near the top of my list of books which have influenced my way of looking at things. I'm a Strategic Thinker, so I see patterns where others see chaos. My knowledge of physics was minimal, my appreciation of art immense. I now have a greater appreciation for both physicists and artists. This book brings it all together! It boggles my mind that a physician can write so well. I liked this book so much, I went through it page by page looking up all the paintings he mentions on the net and putting together my own "study guide" which I've shared with other people who then want to read the book. Fascinating insights, well written, a true mind-expander. My only regret is that the publishers didn't put in more and more of the art he talks about.
Rating:
Summary: Great Topic, Poor Product
Review: It seems from a few better-read reviewers that Shlain's views on history are less than objective. I won't stick up for him as an author by pretending to know what they know. But I will stick up for this book as a whole. When I first read this, I was an ignorant reader and thinker. This book opened my eyes to a world I glimpsed from the periphery but could not fully recognize. It made me very interested in art, science, philosophy and mathematics (and reading also, as it happens). In essence, it provided that first drop of water that started my brain to becoming the presently insatiable sponge it is. Shlain writes in a very accessible manner, not only in syntax, but also in how he presents information. Though his presentation of theories may be 'shallow', he covers a broad subject in a small amount of space on the page. This enables someone unfamiliar with the concept to grasp it easily. Relativity is much easier to grasp over a span of three pages in plain words with numerous illustrations than it is by reading Einstein's original writings. And Einstein's writings are always out there if further, in-depth, analysis is desired. Though there is a thesis here, this book is better as an introduction to ideas of perception than it is a piece of scientific genius. If you believe that there is more to the world than what you see, but can't quite grasp the concept, this book is for you. Inherent in that statement is the suggestion that you are not an art historian or an actual physicist. If you already have a strong idea of how the world physically works, this will probably be little more than a review. That said, there is a connection between art and science, and Shlain does a good job of providing a compare/contrast presentation of the dichotomy.
| 
