How to be Both question

Interesting question. I believe it is in itself a work of art, an ekphrastic novel, if you will. Does Ms. Smith take off into uncharted territory? Certainly. But I am willing to follow her. I look at del Cossa's work, and there is something there, a richness, roundness, a substantial flesh, a joy and a witchcraft that I don't see in other artists of that school or period. Given how little is know of him, why not take a flight of fancy and propose that he was a woman, and therein lies a difference in perception? There have been women throughout history who have donned the persona of a man and gone to war. Why not take the freedom thus afforded and attack the world of art?

I thought it was wonderfully imaginative. I think it invites a closer inspection of art, of our own personal response to it. Because I do believe in entering into art, to speaking back to it, to not standing dumbly before it and waiting for the art to speak to me. I have to dig in myself before I understand its language.

So, a lesson in looking? I don't think it either explicates the art or detracts from it. Don't you think it looks at the mind of an artist, first and foremost?

And how interesting, the patronage. None of that has changed, has it!

Such a fine topic. Oddly, I find it difficult to remember the other half of the book, the modern story, I was so taken by the del Cossa portion. I only read it a few months ago, but I have to page through it again when I'm at the library some Sunday.

You must have an opinion? What do you think? I think it revered the art and the artist.

Edit: Did you intend to set this up as a "Question" rather than a discussion? We shan't be able to have any back and forth without a lot of manoeuvring. Well, as one chooses.