Title: Boring
Product review: I don't know of Wollheim's claim to fame, other than as a graduate student he helped A. J. Ayer in his writings. Be that as it may, this book (and everything Wollheim has written) is so droll and irrelevant to the philosophy of art. I suspect he is trying so hard to be anglo-analytic in his approach that he forgot that art touches the heart as well as the mind. Wollheim focuses entirely on the mind, and the mind games that ensue do little to enlighten one's understanding of art and its objects, what and why they do what they, and why they're important. This book was used in a course I had with Wollheim as a lecturer; both could not have been more boring and banal. The book was widely resold as many students didn't bother to read it, or began to read it and gave up. The consensus was nearly unanimous in irrelevance to the artist especially, and no less irrelevant to the philosophy students.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
