Art and Truth after Plato // Reviews // Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews // University ... - 4 views
-
The purpose of this book, we are told right at the start, is to address anew 'the old question, often neglected in contemporary aesthetic debates, about art and truth, or art and cognition' (p. 1)
-
His purpose is to survey these varied responses, trace their development and adjudicate among them
-
very widely, and considers many writers who get scant attention nowadays
- ...14 more annotations...
-
His opening chapter sets out Plato's contentions about art and truth
-
-
In any event, though the chapter on 'Christian Platonic and Anti-Platonic Art' is not noticeably shorter than the others, it does not have a key role in the philosophical trajectory that Rockmore is tracing.
-
-
very widely, and considers many writers who get scant attention nowadays
-
Not clear if these are positive or negative points, but the focus on those who receive scant attention point seems positive.
-
-
-
-
rather long and unusual excursion through Marxist aesthetics.
-
There is implicit judgement here, and no imagination about why Rockmore might be taking this approach. More generosity needed here.
-
-
This is a hugely ambitious book, and the range of reading that has gone into its making cannot but be impressive, though the steady flow of many lengthy summaries and brief references to a huge number of writers makes for rather heavy going on the part of the reader.
-
Praise, tempered by a sort of critique here. As if a simply positive remark can't stand on its own. Also, the vocabulary is one of coercion "cannot but be impressive."
-
-
more importantly flawed, and in a number of critical ways
-
-
No real evidence is offered of this neglect, and indeed the book is remarkable for making virtually no reference to contemporary work in aesthetics.
-
Fair point about references, but fine. Then belittling language "even the briefest survey would show..." - shame tactic.
-
-
Rockmore might object
-
Indication that the reviewer is imagining his way into the mind of the author - imagine a response. Good.
-
-
Viewed in this light, however, it does not come out very well.
-
So simple positive comments are avoided, but simple negative ones are not. Then ... "conspicuous failures."
-
-
(to my mind)
-
-
serious methodological weaknesses that undermine some of its claims.
-
-
what most people recognize to be a caricature
-
-
It is no pleasure to give a serious and substantial philosophical work such a low rating. So on the positive side I think it can safely be said that readers will undoubtedly benefit from Rockmore's range of reference.
-
