This should have been a good book. Art is such a wide field, and opinions hotly contested even among experts: anyone who likes art or is interested in learning more would welcome a guide to this complex world. But the author writes in a bone dry voice, and is long winded= making even simple sentences a slog to get through. In the end, this book seems written more for his benefit than others.

If you can't take one of the author's six-hour seminars, this book is the next best thing. With 45 color illustrations of key works, it attempts to cover the highlights of art history in a way that the reader can learn skills to discover the rest. The style is light-hearted and informal, but not excessively so. It even has phonetic pronunciations for unfamiliar names and terms. Even if you know nothing about art before reading the book, it will build your confidence and interest to explore more about art.

Thank you to the publishers and NetGalley for the opportunity to review a temporary digital ARC in exchange for an unbiased review.

The text of this book is basically an adaption of a six hour lecture series on art by the author, which is nice, because most people don't have access to attend the lectures (I would love to, however). The tone is not exactly conversational, more casual and not full of terms and references you won't get, but not dumbed down either. Wisniewski helps put art into context, letting the reader see art with new eyes and a fresh perspective. A book to have, keep, and mull over.

#TheArtofLookingatArt #NetGalley

Gene Wisniewski adapted his 6 hour seminar on art history into this book and he did a pretty good job. I'm not sure exactly what I expected when I downloaded this ARC, I was hoping he would discuss specific paintings and artist and explain why they were so important to history. He does this a little but focus is on
When was the first art made?
Who decides which art is "for the ages"?
What is art's purpose?
How do paintings get to be worth tens of millions of dollars?
Where do artists get their ideas?
And perhaps the most pressing question of all, have human cadavers ever been used as art materials?
I wish there were a few more illustrations. I liked the writing style, more conversational than lecture. I received a copy of this ARC in exchange for a fair and honest review.

Gene Wisniewski is an art lover, and The Art of Looking at Art is evidence of that. This book is adapted from the author’s seminar, The Six Hour Art Major Seminar. This is important to keep in mind, as the style of the book is as conversational and discursive as seminars tend to be. He moves easily from Jacques Louis David to the Harappan civilization of the Indus River Valley. He interrupts his discussion of the Italian Renaissance to discuss the work of Tim Noble and Sue Webster. These chronological jumps can be novel and show how artists have used wide ranging techniques to elicit a human reaction - regardless of the century.

The book is ambitious, seeking to address art history, the art market, celebrity in art, and how to approach and look at artwork. And, while the author touches on all of these topics, there is a lack of depth to the treatment of each. It would be an impossible task to present an in-depth exploration of all of these specialities in under 300 pages. Ultimately, this book is an excellent overview or high-level summary of the major movements and issues in the study of art and the art market.

This book claims to be for all audiences, but I think it is best suited for novices or those new to art and art history. It is overly general for the expert or anyone who has studied art and art history at the college or university level.

The strength of this work is in its conversational and approachable tone. Wisniewski never condescends to his audience. He reveals why the average person should care about historical and contemporary artworks in a way that is highly pragmatic and clear.

The later half of the book is the strongest. The author explains the elements of art - color, proportion, line, value, and texture. I may have preferred to have this section at the beginning of the book rather than the end. It would have given the reader some additional tools for viewing and analyzing the artworks reproduced in the book. His discussion of contemporary artists is much stronger and more interesting than his treatment of historical artworks - which seemed overly generalized. Due to the wide range of topics, the author often introduced a compelling question or problem, and then abandoned it in order to move on. For example, in describing Manet’s 1863 painting Dejeuner sur l’herbe, Wisniewski points out influences from Titian. He asks the reader to consider why Manet was referencing the artist, but then moves on without exploring that influence any further.

This is an entertaining and easy-to-read introduction to art and the art world. The footnotes are an excellent source of additional information for the interested reader. I enjoyed the book overall, even if I was underwhelmed by its summary treatment of art history in general.

The Art of Looking at Art A Review by Michael Potashnik

The Art of Looking at Art is a wonderful new book written by Gene Wisniewski who teaches art at New York University and other schools in Manhattan. He is the author of a Six Hour Art Major Seminar and is himself an artist who exhibits in local galleries. In this new book, which he compiled over seven years, Wisniewski draws heavily upon his extensive knowledge of Western art history and provides us many thoughtful ideas and insights on how to approach art, understand it and appreciate it. The book covers a lot of ground and each chapter is packed with gems of information and interesting insights with extensive footnotes for further reading. Those who plan to read the book need to be aware that Wisniewski often goes off on what I consider tangents in discussing different topics. However, what he has to say is usually informative, interesting and worth reading. Ironically, it is the last chapter which provides the most useful guidance on how to look at art.
In the opening chapter, readers are given ten reasons to appreciate art, although I would assume anyone reading this book, wouldn’t need reasons to appreciate art. Some of Wisniewski’s reasons which I summarize here are rather creative: i) art tells interesting stories about life, ii) art is controversial and people observe it differently and have widely different opinions of it, iii) art builds connections for people with far of places and different cultures iv) art can be persuasive and used for good or evil v) art takes on the big issues and causes often against governments, vi) artists contribute to urban renewal, moving into places that have otherwise been abandoned and when renewed, move out to colonize other places, vii) there is an art of art viii) art usually makes artists happy and miserable, ix) art is therapeutic and has healing ability, x) making and developing art, and learning how to look at art is beneficial to everyone.
The chapters which follow cover different topics in art and art history. I am assuming that these topics are intended to give readers a greater understanding and appreciation of art which in turn will help them develop the art of looking at art. This is not an easy task and having read through this book more than once, I would argue that while some of the chapters are quite relevant to this task others, although interesting, are not that relevant. I suspect that Wisniewski would not share this assessment , as he believes, all knowledge of art in one way or another can help us improve our ability to look at art. I guess I will leave that judgment up to the reader, and I will focus the rest of this review on the sections which I think are most relevant to developing the art of observing art.
Readers interested in the art of the Stone Age and anthropoid art will find an interesting chapter entitled “ The First 95 Percent of Art History” In the chapter Wisniewski provides a short course on what he calls 95% on the art (if we include craft, design and technology) of the Stone Age which dates back over 3 million years and art-like objects which only began to make their appearance 10,000 years ago when man settled in Europe. He also discusses anthropoid art and the artistic expression of animals like Congo a chimpanzee that painted pictures which were in demand by the likes of Picasso, Miro and Dali. All this may be relevant to the art of looking at art, but it might be a stretch for some readers. In the chapter “From Artisan to Artist,” there is an excellent overview of the evolution of art from the classical period through the Renaissance and the role played by artisans and artists. This is somewhat more relevant to understanding the great works of classical and modern art. In a chapter “The Places of Muses” Wisniewski focuses on museums, their origin and emergence in different countries. We learn that museums emerged only recently and from the private collections of the wealthy. The British Museum, for example, was started with the private collection of Hans Sloane. In America there were several candidates for first museum. In new York it was the NY historical Society which predates the Met by 70 years. The important point here is that you need to got to museums to truly appreciate art, and not settle for seeing them on a computer.
In “Art vs. Life” Wisniewski discusses art as a cultural artifact of time and place. If you don’t like modern art, he tells us blame modern life. He discusses the interesting debate whether life reflects art or art reflects life and is personally of the view that art reflects life. He elaborated on the emergence of pop culture and the popularization of art which he argues had previously belonged to the rich with some few exceptions (eg. Albert Duerer of Denmark in the 15th century made art for everyone.) In the rest of the chapter, he covers the rise of “graffiti bombers” like Taki 183 and how he and others became recognized by galleries and how they complimented rap music and break dancing. I was disappointed not to find more about Basquait.
In a chapter called “The Thirteen Or So Traits of Creative People (According to Me) includes a longish section on originality, one of the most important traits of creative people. According to Wisniewski “the truth is some of the most important art ever made has relied on theft ” not originality and he cites the work of the art historian Vasari who wrote of Raphael’s s copying of Michelangelo, Leonardo and other artists of the period. Apparently Cezanne’s work had an important influence on Picasso and Braque’s cubism, and Cezanne was influenced by Camille Pissarro. Marcel Duchamp’s Nude Descending a Staircase (No.2) was Cubist-inspired. There are many such examples, but I see this as “influence” not “theft” especially if the artist creates a unique work art or elaboration. In fact elaboration is among Wisniewski’s traits of creative people. These artists work in series and are able to develop ideas worth pursuing or elaborating on. Other traits that strike me as important in painting include, determination or willingness to spend time in preparation and execution of art, sometimes over a period of years. Georges Seurat apparently spent two years on his painting A Sunday Afternoon on the Island of Le Grande Jatte Michelangelo need four years to finish the Sistine Chapel. A long attention span is another one of the traits of creative people as is Productivity. According to Wisniewski Picasso had all the thirteen traits, which is not surprising.
In the final chapter “What to Look For When You Look at Art” Wisniewski pulls together different ideas on how to approach art, analyze it, and appreciate it. He begins by discussing “art as object” or how artists do their work and the different art medium, materials and techniques they use to achieve their objectives. All art materials present challenges to the artist, as do the rules and methods in their use. Wisniewski also examines the evolution of art materials and how they have altered the history of art. For example, the invention of paint tubes and the French easel, gave artists of the nineteenth century an opportunity to paint plein art -outdoors, which artists hadn’t done before.
As for what to look for when looking at art, Wisniewski suggests correctly that is far better to visit a museum to see a piece of art than to look at it on a computer. When at the museum you should think about what drew you to a work of art in the first place. You can also ask questions of the art such as those compiled by Professor Craig Roland of the University of Florida Gainsville. For example: “ Pretend you are inside this painting. What does it feel like?” “What does this painting remind you of?” “What other titles would you give it?” Less helpful is the advice, if you can’t figure out a painting, ask some else or “ look it up somewhere.” Or the advice: if you are looking at artwork that is five hundred or five thousand years old, try to adopt the mentality of someone who lived five hundred or five thousand years ago. How one does that, Wisniewski doesn’t tell us.
More useful is a rich discussion of topics such as balance and weight movement, , shape, space and proportion. He discusses movement repetition and shapes in art citing Kandinsky’s Composition VIII, a wonderful example. He continues the discussion of shape focusing on the exciting paintings of artist, Al Held. There is also a wonderful discussion of space, positive and negative, in art and the different ways it has been used by different artists from the time of Pompei to Andrew Wyeth and Max Beckmann.
In conclusion, as I noted in the introduction to this review, Wisniewski’s book is well worth reading, but I should make clear, if I haven’t already, it isn’t a book or those who might only have a passing interest in art.
July 27, 2020
McLean, VA