Jim Brown reviewed Disordered Attention by Claire Bishop
"We need to find other ways to describe the disorderly operations of attention today"
This book is more a work of art history and criticism than it is one of attention. The author admits that the essays were separate works and that she eventually saw the through line of attention afterwards. I think the introduction offers an interesting answer to the current commonplaces about attention. It argues for a better and more complex account of attention, one that moves beyond depth vs. surface, or slow vs. fast. I am intrigued by that argument, and I think the body chapters have some interesting nuggets (especially chapter 2's discussion of "hybrid spectatorship" which considers the multiple audiences of a performance, those who are "present" and those who are not).
I am also sympathetic to this:
"'Distraction' is more of a moral judgement than a coherent description of how we look and think." (15)
This book is more a work of art history and criticism than it is one of attention. The author admits that the essays were separate works and that she eventually saw the through line of attention afterwards. I think the introduction offers an interesting answer to the current commonplaces about attention. It argues for a better and more complex account of attention, one that moves beyond depth vs. surface, or slow vs. fast. I am intrigued by that argument, and I think the body chapters have some interesting nuggets (especially chapter 2's discussion of "hybrid spectatorship" which considers the multiple audiences of a performance, those who are "present" and those who are not).
I am also sympathetic to this:
"'Distraction' is more of a moral judgement than a coherent description of how we look and think." (15)