Nicholas Mirzoeff

White Sight by Nicholas Mirzoeff is an accessible but challenging book that does a very good job of defining and demonstrating what white sight is and how it came to be.

While accessible it is challenging in the sense that a reader will need to refrain from balking at every point Mirzoeff makes, at least until after the argument is complete. I come to this from a very sympathetic point of view, in that I started the book not so much needing to be convinced as looking for explanations of what I already see in our society. Because of teaching and debating similar ideas, I approach many things with what I anticipate will be questions or opposition. What I will suggest, based on this, is that the reader not make too many of the references personal, whether referring to an artist or to themselves.

I will use a vague example so as not to disrupt the argument as presented in the book. When a drawing or work of art is cited as illustrating white sight, especially one from centuries ago, don't start making the argument that the artist never intended to make such a point. This has less to do with artist intentionality and more to do with what, in total, such representations came to represent. Bracket, as best you can, both your immediate opposition and your immediate agreement and let the argument unfold. Then come back after understanding what Mirzoeff is trying to say and see which points you bracketed are still relevent to the big picture.

A quick aside. I saw a review that actually gave the impression that citing the writers and theorists you're using is a bad thing. Yes, no doubt that person has other reasons for not liking the book and disguised them as an asinine complaint. If I read a book, or even a journal article, on phenomenology and don't see some references to Husserl, Heidegger, Merleau-Ponty, etc, I have to question the author's honesty. Are they claiming ideas as their own that aren't, or are they just ignoring all that has been learned before and reinventing the wheel? So if this review ever gets shared widely, which I can't imagine the person would want to do, ignore it and feel sorry for such a weak attempt to hide their own biases.

Another aside, this book made me think of an essay I read a couple years ago that might be of interest to readers with an interest in the art world and racial images/representations. In the Fall 2019 issue of The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, there is a very interesting essay by Alia Al-Saji. Though not making the same argument it does touch on some of the same issues.

I would recommend this book to anyone interested in understanding the history of white sight as well as ideas on overcoming it. The work that may be involved in grasping the nuances of the argument will be richly rewarded.

Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.… (altro)