Brilliant bad review of Van Eyck and the Pre Raphaelites

[Nearly Sane]

Chapeau!


https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2017/sep/28/reflections-van-eyck-and-the-pre-raphaelites-review-not-worth-a-look

[Shaker]

Not really brilliant; more a rather childish venting of spleen which forgets the inherent subjectivity of aesthetics. One commenter nailed it:

So you don't like the premise of the exhibition. You think they should have done something else. So you slag off the curators for not doing it 'your way'.

You don't like the Pre-Raphaelites. So you slag them off for not being artists you do like.

Am I the only one who thnk you haven't really written a review, just a rant against the world not being how you'd like it?

(And yes, you do come across as a massive snob. Aesthetics is only a matter of opinion - and if someone doesn't agree with your opinion you dismiss them as having no taste. There's your definition of a snob, right there.)

[Nearly Sane]

Not really brilliant; more a rather childish venting of spleen which forgets the inherent subjectivity of aesthetics. One commenter nailed it:

Which rather fails by making an objective statement about something they claim is subjective. Mebbes they need a mirror. I don't agree with the review but I love its passion.

[Shaker]

"Jones writing about art reminds me of the time I tried to play piano with my elbows."

 

[Walter]

Not really brilliant; more a rather childish venting of spleen which forgets the inherent subjectivity of aesthetics. One commenter nailed it:

You may be surprised that someone like me can really appreciate good art. My particular favourite is the one with the Dogs Playing Pool .Outstanding.