Roger Kimball

Author Robert Kimball, the art critic for the National Review, protests too much. The Rape of the Masters is a little too easy for him; some of the politically correct art historian writing he criticizes is almost self-parody. Several paintings and their deconstructions critiques get manhandled; the centerpiece is Kimball’s annihilation of Professor David Lubin’s analysis of John Singer Sargeant’s The Daughters of Edward Darley Boit.

Professor Lubin decides that the important part of show more the painting is not the picture, but the fact that the subjects have the surname “Boit“, which is only slightly different from the French word boîte, and that the father of the children has the first name “Edward”. Lubin decides that the “E” in Edward represents a man with an erection; the î in boîte is a circumcised penis, and the e in boîte is a clitoris; thus the painting actually represents Edward Darley Boit’s desire to prostitute his daughters. I’ll never be able to eat alphabet soup again.


As I said, this is really too easy for Kimball. But I think he goes a little too far. Another deconstructionist critique he goes after is Anna Chave’s of a Mark Rothko painting, Untitled 1953.

Chave (in much more roundabout language) says one of the things the painting symbolizes is an open grave; Kimball dismisses this with the contention that it’s just an attractive arrangement of colored rectangles. You know what, though? For me, it does kind of suggest an open grave – which in turn suggests the gravedigger scene from Hamlet, Shakespere in general, Gweneth Paltrow, a girl I had a crush on in high school, miniskirts, the war in Vietnam, Grignard reactions, lithium batteries, the Tesla car, the Tunguska meteorite impact, iridium, my sled Rosebud, and I could go on for a while. Art is supposed to inspire some sort of emotion in the viewer, and if Untitled 1953 inspires something that the artist did not intend, what’s the harm in that? (Although if The Daughters of Edward Darley Boit inspires a desire to prostitute your children, I hope you’re institutionalized somewhere).

Thus, The Rape of the Masters is OK as yet another preaching-to-the-choir attack on Deconstructionism, but perhaps doesn’t say as much as Kimball thinks it does about our reactions to art. show less

Allan Bloom's "The Closing of the American Mind" is perhaps the first, best, and most enduring work to emerge from the "traditionalist" side of the "campus wars" of the 1980s. "Tenured Radicals" is part of smattering of follow up works that sing a similar tune on matters academic. Although almost twenty years old, it remains worthwhile reading for those observing or taking part in the larger cultural battles.

Shorter, more incisive, and more deliberately focused than "The Closing...", show more "Tenured Radicals" sets its sights on the failings of contemporary literary critics and the humanities departments that house them. In witty, occasionally laugh out loud prose Kimball clearly demonstrates the extent to which obscurantist continental philosophy (from Structuralism to Derrida), overt political radicalism, interest group politics, and increased specialization/professionalization colluded and collided in a way that led humanists and humanities departments to jettison nearly all of their traditional prerogatives and aspirations.

At this point the story line is hackneyed and perhaps overblown (although mostly true), so, despite the textual evidence Kimball provides to support his critique, the reason this book is still of interest is not that it argues well for true conclusions (although it often does). Rather, "Tenured Radicals" retains a space in this literature because it is funny and sarcastic in a way that makes it fun to read for those already inclined to agree with Kimball's assessment of the contemporary humanities department.

Much of the argumentation consists of Kimball laying out a paragraph from some latter day sophist and then writing "are you serious....like, for real?" or some clever variation thereon. In many ways this seems to me to be the most effective strategy for dealing with the Derrida acolytes. One wonders how else to argue with those who deny modus ponens and the transitivity of identity. Further, the rather personal attack on Stanley Fish is, in my estimation, a great bonus. Perhaps Kimball engages in a bit of straw-manning and a bit of ad hominem, but I tend to think such practices are allowable (within reason) in a polemic. "Tenured Radicals" is very much a polemic but it's composed well and retains a great sense of humor. For this reason, interested culture warriors may still get a kick out of it and, even if the narrative is predictable, may absorb a few new facts about the obscurantist opposition. show less

A devastating critique on my parent's generation. Kimball is obviously distraught at the state of modern American culture, and I have a hard time disagreeing with him. He traces this back a series of writers and thought leaders that inspired the worst of the 60s generation. Most of his time is spent on the writing and saying of the influential people of the day, but he does cover some of the mass movements (e.g. student protest at Yale defending murderer Bobby Seale) and the capitulation of show more many who should have known and acted better.

Also, you can see the Left's planned takeover of Academia with quotes like "working against the established institutions while working through them" from Herbert Marcuse. They were obviously very successful and perhaps the worst of "What the 60s Wrought" (which is the title of the final chapter).

This book is packed with information and yet, it is very readable. From what I can tell, Slouching Towards Gomorrah by Robert Bork and The Closing of the American Mind by Alan Bloom should be good companion pieces to this great book. show less

In the spirit of William F Buckley, Kimball offers a series of essays centered on various writers and their works (Hayek, Kipling, Burnham and others) to diagnose current ills and to offer a remedy.