In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:The Journal of Aesthetic Education 40.4 (2006) 65-76 MuseSearchJournalsThis JournalContents[Access article in PDF]Identity, Aesthetics, ObjectsGustavo GuerraIn September 1990 UCLA's Wright Art Gallery opened an exhibition entitled Chicano Art: Resistance and Affirmation 1965-1985 (now usually referred to as CARA). While CARA was one of several national events displaying nonmainstream art, it was also distinctive in its politics of self-representation. The artists participating in CARA insisted that they be described as (...) members of a Chicano art movement. With the term Chicano they hoped to step beyond labels preferred by the dominant culture—labels such as Mexican American, Latino, or Hispanic. For these artists, the word Chicano was appealing because it represented a complexity of meanings that they understood as being integral to both their identity and to the art they produced. The word Chicano, as Alicia Gaspar de Alba discusses in Chicano Art Inside/Outside the Master's House,1 embraces multiple meanings and axes of cultural identity; it derives from the Nahuatl pronunciation of Mexicano, often referring to a person of Aztec descent but including, as well, Native American heritage, Mexican roots, and Catholic faith. The CARA artists also embraced the label's association with a politics of liberation, popular protest, and working-class creativity. From the outset, then, the CARA exhibition was more than an art exhibition.By some lights, however, CARA was too much more than an art exhibition. When the organizers realized they needed funds, they applied for a National Endowment of the Humanities (NEH) grant and were initially turned down. While an NEH rejection might mean a number of things, the language of the rejection reports in this case narrows the possibilities down [End Page 65] to an issue that I mean to consider in this article. One rejection report states thatThe panelists understood that Chicano art arose from a variety of political movements and social causes, and therefore the political aspect of this proposal is appropriate to the subject matter.... Even so, the panelists worried that the project makes a political statement, that it is politics masquerading as culture, and that the proposal contains jargon and rhetoric and reads like a manifesto. 2Other reviewers objected to the general language of the report along similar lines. While Chicano artists made a point of representing themselves in complex, multidimensional terms, the NEH found such complexity and multidimensionality perplexing and thus their art not worthy of funding. One referee, for instance, claimed that the terminology used in the proposal was too narrow; he complained that defining Chicano in terms of struggle was too restrictive and excluded other Chicano artists for whom struggle was not a major concern. But later the same reporter objected that some of the concepts in the proposal were not inclusive enough, as they failed to include issues and topics that are central to the Chicano community. Thus the complexity and cluttered characterization that the artists felt was central to their sense of identity was dismissed as either too excessive or as too restrictive. According to the NEH, Chicano artists failed not because of their art (which the referees did describe as "visually compelling") but because of the way in which they chose to identify themselves—because, in other words, of their "rhetoric and jargon." Whatever it was that the NEH found compelling in the Chicano art they found uncompelling in the description of the Chicano artists' lives.After the organizers revised their proposal and reapplied for the grant, they were once again turned down. This second rejection highlights even more clearly the nature of the problem. This second report argues that "[T]here is a disjunction between the organizers' intentions and the exhibition. The proposal does not differentiate clearly between Chicano art and Hispanic art and, in its dependence on self-referential analysis rather than a comparative perspective, the exhibition does not place art in the bigger picture." 3I would like to consider what is at issue when descriptions of identity are said not to work, or when descriptions of art are likewise accused of failure and... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:^ be clear and sometimes ambiguous. For example, Del Castillo warns readers ^ that Dewey will be ambivalent about when and where the actions of the KH state or of the free market are needed to deal with social problems. The ^* ambivalence is, in part, Del Castillo argues, because Dewey's view of the / complexities of social life prevented him from adopting simplistic political stands (p. 33). Del (...) Castillo's argument is correct, but a more straightforward explanation is that Dewey was a contextualist and that, therefore, the theoretical task of trying to set the proper limits of the state is ideological and non-intelligent. This is how one can stand on the ideal of democracy without the need to decide between laissez-faire liberalism and socialism for all times and places. Del Castillo warns the reader not to expect from The Public and its Problems the precision and systematic character of recent works on political theory, but that it has an energetic and provocative character missing in much contemporary works in this area of inquiry. Del Castillo is correct and part of the reason is the book's continued relevance to present conditions in the U.S. If things in the U.S. had gone in the direction that Dewey pointed toward, there would be no need today to read or to translate The Public and its Problems. As Del Castillo says in his final sentences, "abundance ended up replacing the civic citizen by the consumer", "American democracy does not look at all like what Dewey envisioned" (p. 54). Does this means that Lippman was right after all? Does it mean that we have not even tried, or tried hard enough, to implement what Dewey proposed? Del CastiUo, does not address these questions, but there is no reason why he should. It is enough that Del Castillo has made available to a larger audience a text and an insightful introduction that helps us have a thoughtful discussion about these important issues. Gregory Fernando Pappas Texas A&M Univeristy, [email protected] Arthur Efron Experiencing Tess of the d'Urbervilles: A Deweyan Account Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2005. xiii+248 pp. $ 72.00 cloth. In Experiencing Tess of the d'Urbervilles, Arthur Efron has accomplished a rather extraordinary task. The book consists primarily of an extended reading of Thomas Hardy's novel using some of John Dewey's main philosophical ideas and concepts, most notably those present in Art as Experience, as a guide. As such, Efron's text amplifies and enriches our understanding of Hardy, Dewey, and their work. I am not using the word "enrich" casually. Through Efron's emotionally charged reading of Tess, Experiencing Tess, becomes an ongoing effort to reclaim what Dewey, in Art as Experience calls oje) "human experience." In that text, Dewey contrasts "human experience" to stagnant and encrusted modes of criticism that fail to "cope with the emer- 7° gence of new modes of life," and this matters because, to use Dewey's own words again, "the very meaning of an important new movement in any art κ-1 is that it expresses something new in human experience, some new form of. interaction of the live creature with his surroundings, and hence the release, of powers previously cramped or inert." Efron 's book is enriching in that sense, in offering readers an "experience," a completely novel way of doing criticism, of reading, and of "feeling" together with a text. I do not think I exaggerate when I say that I do not know of any other work of recent literary criticism that accomplishes this. Experiencing Tess focuses most particularly on what we might call the vicissitudes of Tess's character and humanity. Yet, as is noted recurrently throughout the text, these ideas can never be entirely separated from Tess's interaction with the various characters that populate Hardy's text, especially of course Angel and Alec. Because Tess's fortunes (or, rather, misfortunes) throughout the novel are, in this richly textured book, carefully digested and interpreted in light of Dewey's understanding of experience, Efron invites us, further, to consider our own relationships with authority and with often unreflective critical practices. Let me specify. It is all too easy to... (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:^ be clear and sometimes ambiguous. For example, Del Castillo warns readers ^ that Dewey will be ambivalent about when and where the actions of the KH state or of the free market are needed to deal with social problems. The ^* ambivalence is, in part, Del Castillo argues, because Dewey's view of the / complexities of social life prevented him from adopting simplistic political stands (p. 33). Del (...) Castillo's argument is correct, but a more straightforward explanation is that Dewey was a contextualist and that, therefore, the theoretical task of trying to set the proper limits of the state is ideological and non-intelligent. This is how one can stand on the ideal of democracy without the need to decide between laissez-faire liberalism and socialism for all times and places. Del Castillo warns the reader not to expect from The Public and its Problems the precision and systematic character of recent works on political theory, but that it has an energetic and provocative character missing in much contemporary works in this area of inquiry. Del Castillo is correct and part of the reason is the book's continued relevance to present conditions in the U.S. If things in the U.S. had gone in the direction that Dewey pointed toward, there would be no need today to read or to translate The Public and its Problems. As Del Castillo says in his final sentences, "abundance ended up replacing the civic citizen by the consumer", "American democracy does not look at all like what Dewey envisioned" (p. 54). Does this means that Lippman was right after all? Does it mean that we have not even tried, or tried hard enough, to implement what Dewey proposed? Del CastiUo, does not address these questions, but there is no reason why he should. It is enough that Del Castillo has made available to a larger audience a text and an insightful introduction that helps us have a thoughtful discussion about these important issues. Gregory Fernando Pappas Texas A&M Univeristy, [email protected] Arthur Efron Experiencing Tess of the d'Urbervilles: A Deweyan Account Amsterdam: Rodopi, 2005. xiii+248 pp. $ 72.00 cloth. In Experiencing Tess of the d'Urbervilles, Arthur Efron has accomplished a rather extraordinary task. The book consists primarily of an extended reading of Thomas Hardy's novel using some of John Dewey's main philosophical ideas and concepts, most notably those present in Art as Experience, as a guide. As such, Efron's text amplifies and enriches our understanding of Hardy, Dewey, and their work. I am not using the word "enrich" casually. Through Efron's emotionally charged reading of Tess, Experiencing Tess, becomes an ongoing effort to reclaim what Dewey, in Art as Experience calls oje) "human experience." In that text, Dewey contrasts "human experience" to stagnant and encrusted modes of criticism that fail to "cope with the emer- 7° gence of new modes of life," and this matters because, to use Dewey's own words again, "the very meaning of an important new movement in any art κ-1 is that it expresses something new in human experience, some new form of. interaction of the live creature with his surroundings, and hence the release, of powers previously cramped or inert." Efron 's book is enriching in that sense, in offering readers an "experience," a completely novel way of doing criticism, of reading, and of "feeling" together with a text. I do not think I exaggerate when I say that I do not know of any other work of recent literary criticism that accomplishes this. Experiencing Tess focuses most particularly on what we might call the vicissitudes of Tess's character and humanity. Yet, as is noted recurrently throughout the text, these ideas can never be entirely separated from Tess's interaction with the various characters that populate Hardy's text, especially of course Angel and Alec. Because Tess's fortunes (or, rather, misfortunes) throughout the novel are, in this richly textured book, carefully digested and interpreted in light of Dewey's understanding of experience, Efron invites us, further, to consider our own relationships with authority and with often unreflective critical practices. Let me specify. It is all too easy to... (shrink)