Comments on: ‘Decentering Modernism’ http://arthistorynewsletter.com/blog/?p=797 News for Art Historians Tue, 16 Nov 2010 08:57:03 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: tw http://arthistorynewsletter.com/blog/?p=797&cpage=1#comment-3017 tw Tue, 17 Feb 2009 17:00:22 +0000 http://arthistorynewsletter.com/blog/?p=797#comment-3017 "since the authors aim to deal with “art” as a universal category..." Did Mitter bother reading Art Since 1900 before making this critique? It's a deeply flawed book, but not one of its authors would even think about positing works of art as at all "universal." Which, exactly, is the author committing the fallacy of copping to Kant's universalism? Please. The book's coverage of non-canon work is regrettable, but accusing those particular writers of universalism seems awfully misguided. “since the authors aim to deal with “art” as a universal category…”

Did Mitter bother reading Art Since 1900 before making this critique? It’s a deeply flawed book, but not one of its authors would even think about positing works of art as at all “universal.” Which, exactly, is the author committing the fallacy of copping to Kant’s universalism? Please. The book’s coverage of non-canon work is regrettable, but accusing those particular writers of universalism seems awfully misguided.

]]>