Jean Sousa

If Faces, places, and inner spaces: a guide to looking at art by Jean Sousa were a person instead of a book, and I had been set up on a blind date with that person, I would have excused myself from the table to use the bathroom and walked straight out of the restaurant without looking back, and I would have done it before the appetizers even came.

After an introduction which provides somewhat vague definitions of faces and places in art and a completely confusing definition of the term inner spaces, the book is divided into three chapters, one for each of the three “concepts” mentioned in the title. From there on the books organization is the same. On each page is a reproduction of a work of art from the museum the author works for with an expository write up to go with it. There is an index of the artists, a glossary of some of the many undefined and unexplained terms and concepts in the book, and an inventory of the works of art included.

I don’t know where to begin with this book. I am surprised at the lack of cohesion and the lack of comprehensibility given that the author is not just an educator, but an award-winning educator. I think it best if I provide a few examples of methods and mistakes in the book, and hopefully that process will gather my thoughts enough that I can come to some conclusion about the over arching thematic failure of this book, which was certainly designed to be bought in a museum gift shop by a consumer pumped up about art having just seen so many great pieces in their visit. Here goes.

I’ll start with tone, because the tone is a big part of why this book doesn’t work. I was reading this book with an eye toward how it could be used in an educational setting. So of course, one considers the intended audience. Now, after considering the complexity of the ideas in the text, one would assume the intended audience is high school and perhaps college. But the tone of the writing is the tone one uses when talking to lower elementary school grades, say K-3. And third grade is pushing it. You can almost here the condescension in the lilting cadence of the questions asked of the reader. “Can you find them?...Do you think he is glad to be out for the evening?....Does this happy scene make you hungry?” The tone tells me this book is meant to be read aloud to younger students, and here my problems begin, because there is no way younger students would have any idea what you were saying to them if you read them this book.

For one, the information is confusing. On the first page, the author calls a painting that is over fifty percent black bright and colorful. Several places elsewhere, the author assues that you see exactly what she sees in the painting and rolls with it. “Notice the way he glances nervously to the left.” She writes of a portrait of a man that to me looks aloof and seems to have a smirk on his face. I could be wrong, but that’s my point; throughout the book interpretation is presented as fact in very confusing terms.

And lets just talk about that word, confusing. On almost every page I found myself scratching my head. “Do you ever wish a mirror could show more than just what’s in front of it?” No, I haven’t. Is that due to some personality defect of mine, have I set my own expectations of mirrors too low? By way of explanation, that question is followed up with “A ‘looking glass’ took Alice on an adventure through Wonderland.” Crickets. Befuddlement. “Why is Mr. Rubin talking about someone named Alice and what do looking glasses have to do with mirrors?” is what I would expect to be going though my students head.

I would expect similar confusion after this survey-of-eastern-religion doozy of a sentence. “Notice the big birds; they are related to Jatayu, a vulture that died trying to rescue Sita.” Got it! Or for more religion, “Why do you think the animal has no face?” the author asks of a photo of an ancient looking, animal shaped statue with no discernible features beyond its head and for legs. My answer would have been that they wore away over time. Wrong. Obviously, it’s because “the Bamana people of Mali, in Africa,

consider it to be magical.”

I could go on and on, but I think I have arrived at my conclusion and want to spare you any more of my griping. This book is confusing. It confused me at times and I am no dummy. But I would not expect a young person to really understand what’s going on in this book. Sure, it is a loose survey of world art, but then why the face, places, inner spaces subheading? These terms are never referred to other than in the introductions to the chapters. Many of the faces write-ups don’t even mention faces. The author jumps between very patronizing questions one finds in the Primary classroom right on up to concept religious and social elements without a bit of explanation. The author obviously has a great love for all these pieces, but presents that love and her interpretation of the pieces as facts which are not just incontrovertible, but also should be reached by the reader as well upon there first glance. I heard somewhere, actually nowhere, that Jatayu, the vulture, was a great editor. Alas, Jatayu died trying to save Sita, and so was not around to try and save this book.… (mais)