Darran AndersonRecensioni
Autore di Imaginary cities
Recensioni
Questo sito utilizza i cookies per fornire i nostri servizi, per migliorare le prestazioni, per analisi, e (per gli utenti che accedono senza fare login) per la pubblicità. Usando LibraryThing confermi di aver letto e capito le nostre condizioni di servizio e la politica sulla privacy. Il tuo uso del sito e dei servizi è soggetto a tali politiche e condizioni.
Darren Anderson curates a very interesting Twitter feed called Oniropolis, each tweet (or thread) of which usually features a collection of images from a given source or artist or city. It's simple, thought-provoking, and very well-spotted. Unfortunately, this book exists almost as a prose version of the same. Anderson flits from one book to a trio of films to the art of a noir painter without describing the works in any meaningful way. But the limitations of print mean that, despite such a visual analysis of the built environment, of art and architecture, it is the words that must suffice in lieu of pictures. But while Anderson's allusions are dense and heavy, they are also fleeting, with a captivating reference to something immediately moved on from, leaving the reader with little grasp of what that reference is or how to learn more about it.
Coming from Anderson's fertile mind, the sheer abundances of sources and references that go unexplained also means that much can escape the reader. For instance:
What is the plot in these? The subject? What do they share save a "cross-section" view of the city? Do they even come from a common period? With this book, you're left wanting for detail, the cumulus clouds of the word tags floating far overhead, casting only a shadow. This isn't to say that the book isn't interesting; indeed, these frustrations are so precisely because one would like to know more about the referred-to material. But in the absence of that detail - or, as I'll address, an easy means of finding it - Imaginary Cities confounds as often as it provokes.
I've saved the most pedantic for last, but the citation structure in Imaginary Cities is lamentable. It's astonishing that the University of Chicago Press, inventors of the ur-standard for citation formatting, seems to have skipped editing this volume entirely. Footnotes follow no given standard; whether or not they even end with a period is a crapshoot. Sometimes the author is included, sometimes the title, never the date. On occasion, without sufficient reference in the text itself, the footnote won't include anything more than a page number (edition? Publication date? Absent entirely). Half of the most interesting allusions in the text aren't even cited! Quotes from separate volumes will follow each other and yet only one given a partial citation. (And to be even more pedantic, sometimes the citation superscript is properly placed outside of punctuation; more often though, it inexplicable comes before even the period.) In short, as much as this book might prompt broader explorations of the material within, its inadequate references and citations make it difficult to further examine the source material.