I read a book about Andy Warhol yesterday. It's a subject I'm quite interested in, which is why I bothered getting the book in the first place, but it was one of those books that is written in a way that isn't really bad enough to make me fling it away in disgust, but not anywhere near good enough to be enjoyable. It was full of tiny, annoying spelling and grammatical errors - about one every five pages, just spaced out enough to let me relax slightly before I hit the next one. And the words that were spelt correctly were so obscure I lost the thread of the sentance. I'm not sure if I'm just dumb, but does the following sentance make sense to anyone else (without using Dictionary.com!):
"A vacuum - vacuousness, vacuity - doubles as hustler: Warhol felt the void's existential seduction most palpably in the form of hustlers ... through easy art techniques, permitting easy evacuation of his uneasy interior matter, transposed to the skin's outside." - Wayne Koestenbaum, Andy Warhol
It's 189 pages long and it's all like that. It struck me that it is a subject the author is presumably passionate about (why else would he bother?) and yet the whole book is so tied up in the glory of the words he so obviously enjoys that the subject is practically obscured. I can understand the attraction of words and that 'hearing the sound of your own voice' fascination but really, who let this guy publish this book?!
Anyway, after finishing the book I was all inspired to get painting, so my flat now stinks of oil paint and turps. I'm so broke at the moment that Christmas is looking exceptionally lean, so I've turned to the weasel strategy of handcrafted gifts... except for my younger brothers and sisters, who are still young enough to demand something they actually want. My parents and the older kids will have to suffer politely. I hope they don't stumble on the same strategy because I'm hanging out for some nice, crass, commercial presents.
Posted by phreq at December 16, 2003 07:33 AM | TrackBackAs I remember from art history, all art books are written in such a way that you have to be part of the "in crowd" to properly understand them.
I'm pretty sure I read some articles that were just as convoluted in my time, although it does seem rather awful. I just love "A vacuum - vacuousness, vacuity " though, must remember to use it in everyday conversation :)
Posted by: jenni at December 16, 2003 09:13 AMI would doubt that 'the crowd' really understands them either, but are somewhat keener than the rest of us on acting as though they do.
That passage you quoted is simply bad writing, in my opinion. Nothing clever about it.
The other thing that annoys me is books (usually non-fiction) that consist mainly of the same ideas repeated with different wording... are they expecting us not to notice that they have no actual content?
I don't know... what is the world coming to?!
Posted by: suraya at December 16, 2003 10:49 AMi couldn't get my head around that sentence let alone a whole books worth...ha ha. ..and welcome :)
Posted by: H at December 16, 2003 02:49 PMThanks
Posted by: Online Home Loans at November 19, 2005 07:31 PM