Customer Reviews

Modern Art, Revised (Trade Version) (3rd Edition)

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

this text was required reading for an uper division Modern Art History course i have taken, which requires no prerequisites. the book, however, certainly assumes previous indepth knowledge of topic. overall, a very informative, technical book.

Everybody knows the boring of reading introduction material about art. It's always more of the same. Because of that I suspected very much this book with its "open title"... No reason for that: Modern Art is a careful work about 20th century aesthetics, crossing an open and contextual perspective with closed analysis of key works. And best of all, the synthetic approach of painting, sculpture and architecture is very well balanced and justified. It's not a book, but a very good surprise as both an introduction as a very deep analysis of 20th century art.

I just completed a college course with this book as the chosen Textbook. The writing was of a much more advanced nature and it actually seemed like it should have been for a more advanced course. Like the title of this review says, you get an advanced English lesson also. It's mainly an Education book, so it probably should be geared more to the Student-through-expert levels. Like most books on art, it is a shame that so many illustrations are in Black & White. It's a cost thing I suppose. The information and opinions were well balanced. The text also has very little unnecessary "Fluff" fillers. I would have no intention of selling the book or trading it away. It's a keeper.

I would NOT recommend this Book. Hunter, Jacobus and Wheeler are very critical and often lend their opinions intrusively with lack of reason / explanation. I had this book for Two Art History classes, the Instructor rarely referenced it, because of the Authors. If you are new to art or want to learn more this is NOT the book!
Example at the end of Chapter 13: "Later, the new style would be used more literally, even daringly, in the "development" of the new city, a process that would also bring with it the wasting, if not complete destruction, of the undervalued heritage of the recent past." Note the Authors spend most of the paragraph bashing the Rockefelier Center in New York. They never explain why it is "bland" or how the effort becomes "pallid". You will literally read chapters over and over, finding little tangible support for the authors conclusions. Imagine the Snobbiest / Know it All Person you know then think about how they would write a book.
MINUSES:
The pictures: Are way to dark, Some are discolored and Stretched to fit the page. Not enough pictures of Architecture.
The chapters are not well organized.
The book over concentrates on Language and Voice: Therefore becoming inconclusive gibberish.
It Fails to bring meaning to its own Title; Modern Art. By the end of the book the reader has No Idea what Modern Art is in a whole: where it has been, why it changed, stylistic elements, political context, and etc.

Everybody knows the boring of reading introduction material about art. It's always more of the same. Because of that I suspected very much this book with its "open title"... No reason for that: Modern Art is a careful work about 20th century aesthetics, crossing an open and contextual perspective with closed analysis of key works. And best of all, the synthetic approach of painting, sculpture and architecture is very well balanced and justified. It's not a book, but a very good surprise as both an introduction as a very deep analysis of 20th century art.

I bought this book for a class, and for a textbook, it's definitely easier to read than most. Unfortunately, it covers a lot of material very quickly, as you must in class, and so jumps from artist to artist and style to style in a bit of a jerky manner. They make the transitions as easy as possible, I just wish we could get more information on the artists, like stories from their lives explaining some of their personalities before we move on to the next. It would make it easier to remember and differentiate between the artists of a period.