Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
The American Society for Aesthetics and Blackwell Publishing are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism.
http://www.jstor.org
Book Reviews
Among recent postmodernist readings of art history and aesthetic theory, Roberts'sapproachhas the
merit of advancinga strong characterizationof postmodernart. The last part of his book argues that the
shift from modern to postmodern art reduces the
Europeantraditionto freely disposablematerialalongside othermaterial,and it replacesthe idea of progress
with an awarenessof contingency.Robertselaborates
his characterization with elan and sophistication,
bringing it into critical dialogue with the views of
JeanBaudrillard,PeterBurger,ArthurDanto, Jiirgen
Habermas,and FredricJameson.
Unlike Adorno, whom he reads as pitting a progressive and authenticSchoenbergagainsta reactionary and inauthenticStravinsky,Robertsabandonsthe
paradigmof progress that guides modernist aesthetics. In fact, he argues that both Schoenberg and
Stravinsky are postmodern artists who simply give
"alternativeresponsesto the situationof contingency
broughtabout by the end of tradition"(p. 131). This
situation, which rendersmodernist aesthetics inadequate, an aestheticsafter Adorno must understand.
"Contingency" is a protean concept in Roberts's
book. On the one hand, it contrastswith the necessity
and continuity that Hegel and Adorno ascribe to the
historical unfolding of art. On the other hand, it
points to the freedom of postmodernartists to choose
among virtually endless options unboundedby tradition. According to Roberts, romantic irony in literature prefigures the "emancipationof contingency"
in postmodernart. After the crisis of traditionand the
shattering of progress, however, contingency becomes systemic. The critiqueof art as art has become
intrinsicto the entireenterpriseof art productionand
art reception. This "self-reflectionon the level of the
system" is a new stage in the enlightenmentof art
(p. 21).
There is something odd about such usage of terms
like "emancipation,""stage," and "enlightenment."
Their appeal seems to derive from he very paradigm
of progressthat Roberts has abandoned.Althoughhe
might esitate to call postmodern art "better" than
modernart, he at least suggests thatpostmodernart is
"good" within the largerhistoricalscheme of things.
YetI am unableto find a basis for this suggestion, and
it is hardto imagine what the basis could be, absent
some latentidea of historicalprogress.
A relatedpuzzle concerns the plausibility of Roberts's claims about the enlightened and emancipated
characterof postmodernart. He says, for example,
that "the system of art is now enlightened, fully
'rational'and self-referential,because it is no longer
blind to itself" (p. 174). While this has some merits
as a claim about art as an independentsystem, the
claim rapidlyloses plausibilitywhen one locates art at
the intersection of politics, economics, electronic
media, and the culture industry.There art seems in-
263
creasinglyless transparentand increasinglyless like a
self-containedsystem.
Indeed, one weakness of Roberts'sbook is that it
paystoo little regardto Adorno'ssocial theory andhis
critiqueof the cultureindustry.These, it seems to me,
provide more fruitful sources for a theory of postmodern art than does Philosophy of Modern Music.
At the same time, the latter work can hardly be
understoodapart from its connections with Adorno's
contemporaneouswritingson fascism, popularmusic,
and the authoritarianpersonality. Although Roberts
touches on similar topics in his brief and suggestive
sections on Jameson (pp. 104-145) and Baudrillard
(pp. 198-207), he does not employ many of the
resources available in Adorno's version of critical
theory.
The motivation for raising this criticism is not a
devotion to Adorno but a concern for the directionof
postmodernist theory. While applauding Roberts's
creative and astute proposals for a theory of postmodernart, I find myself wishing for greaterengagement with political, economic, and broadly cultural
issues. For the "crisis of tradition" has not been
limitedto art, andthe "emancipationof contingency"
now pervades the entire culture of late capitalism.
Moreover, the significance of these developments
depends on larger movements toward freedom and
justice and peace than the arts as such can provide. It
was precisely such movements, or the obstructionsto
them, that Adorno tried to disclose in the art and
culture of his time. Their disclosure in our time is a
challenge facing any theory "afterAdorno."
LAMBERT ZUIDERVAART
Departmentof Philosophy
Calvin College
SHAPIRO, GARY. Alcvone: Nietzscheon Gifts,
264
265
Book Reviews
the voice of Alcyone is a gendered voice, and that it
recalls the very themes that Nietzsche, throughZarathustra,forces on the West's philosophicalattention:
it speaks of "gifts. friends, lovers, and pregnancy
ratherthanof eternal meaningsand values" (p. 148).
These concerns are denouncedby the Socrates of the
Republic, who declared the imitation of women's
lamentations(when "sick or in love or in labor")to be
unworthyof men. Thus, by reinstatingthese themes,
Nietzsche again worksto undercutthe premisesof the
Westerntraditionerectedby Plato.
Shapiro'sdemonstrationof thematicfocus in Zarathustraon some of the "womanly" concerns highlighted in the Alcyone myth and derogatedby Plato is
convincing. However,Shapiroseems to place considerableimportanceon genderas such in his interpretation of Zarathustra, in ways that are rather worrisome. In the first place, Shapiro throughout the
book presupposes an extremely traditionalbifurcation of male and female roles. He remarksat one point
in his reading, "Zarathustraplays the mother here,
runningafter the crying infants, taking responsibility
for the household;and then reassuringthe criers with
a promise of food, rest and play" (p. 73). This
reading imports gender considerations of a distinctively nonprogressivenatureinto the text; it does not,
however, demonstrate that Nietzsche is concerned
with gender in the passage in question. Again, rather
oddly, Shapiroinserts into his retellingof the Alcyone
myth the parentheticalremark, "Iris is a carrier of
messages or an interpreterbetween humansand gods
by vocation, havingtasks similarto Hermes';perhaps
this complex chain is an indication of what iristics,
the feminine alternative to hermeneutics, might be
if we introduce our own antonomasia" (p. 114).
No explanation is given as to why there should be
a "feminine alternative to hermeneutics" (aside,
perhaps, from the fact that the interpretationsof
Nietzsche that Shapirochooses to discuss are almost
exclusively written by men). Shapiro seems to presuppose that "masculine" and "feminine" are clear
concepts, andconcepts in evident opposition.
This assumptionis again evident in Shapiro'squick
moves from any textual suggestion of eroticism to
heterosexualinterpretations.For example, in perusing a poem from Nietzsche's notebooks, Shapiro
concludes from the lines "the orgiastic soul-I've
seen him" that a woman is speaking. This does not
follow. The eroticismevident in Zarathustramightbe
considerablymore pronouncedif one allows for the
possibility that homoeroticismmight be involved in
the interactionsof the male characters. But Shapiro
presupposes that issues of gender and eroticism in
Zarathustrawill take a heterosexual form. Shapiro
similarly looks for a male/female duality behind
Nietzsche'sclaims thathe was "pregnant"with Zarathustra. Although "pregnancy"is a common roman-
Departmentof Philosophy
Universityof Texasat Austin
BANN, STEPHEN and WILLIAM ALLEN, eds.