Research Assignment Paper About Modernity in Asian Art (Book Review Sample)

Name:
Lecturer:
Course:
Date:
Modernity in Asian Art
This book deals jointly with the account of modern art in Asia, based on journals from a forum on Post-Modernism and Modernism in Asian Art exhibited at the Australian National University. The introduction by John Clark and preamble by Virginia Spate are unique evaluations on cross-disciplinary matters and are followed by essays on Philippines, Japan, Thailand, Taiwan, Indonesia, and China. The book in review unequivocally exhibits that his aim of providing a “regionally assimilated summary to the early histories and archeologists of the recent countries of Japan, China, and Korea for students taking on this subject initially” is unachievable without broad remedy to publications in East Asian dialects. In constructing his chronicle, which varies from human beginnings right through A.D 800, Clark exhibits worthy anthropological judgment (Clark 138).
His text is readable and succinct, and the selection of artworks, while occasionally unanticipated, is fascinating for its emphasis on preceding lifeway. In his initial depiction of East Asian archaeology, the writer merits applause for demystifying three common misconceptions: taking it for granted that changes throughout East Asia were always intertwined, supposing a unidirectional superficial flow of “high” art, music, and literature from a reified “China”, and sanctioning ones understanding of archeological facts to be acclimatized by modern political boundaries. Also worthwhile is his dissimilarity between the “challenger,” “elaborator,” and “illustrator” methods in his argument of the relationship between archaeology and textual history. Professionals will be fascinated by his assimilation of East Asian archeological data into an overall structure of social progression in sync with conventional unanimity in present anthropology.
This demands disdain and perception of historical specificity, and detractors might highlight cases where East Asian proof suggests modifying broad view derived from Western data, but at least Clark is flawless in his explanations and applies his language steadily. The book is tainted by discrepancies in coverage. A professional on Korea and Japan, Clark greatly accentuates archeological finds from both these countries. Granting more than a few chapters deal entirely with the “China mainland,” the collection of data in them regularly give the impression as steered by a wish to describe and contextualize this Korean and Japanese substantiation. More earnestly, the China-related script is filled with straightforward errors. This conflicts what Clark states on (145), “for example, neither in Qin did the First Emperor lose his power, nor would most accountable academics in the pres...