G. Roger Denson brings singular insight to Thomas McEvilley's writings. As an art writer he has explored similar territory, but from the point of view of a nomadic ideologist. His approach matches that of his subject. He addresses the issues of pragmatism, historicism, and cultural relativism. In so doing, he effectively dismantles the need to establish a master narrative. The contrast and agreement between these two writers constitutes a mapping of the terrain of contemporary culture. What sets Thomas McEvilley apart from other critics in art and culture is his direct knowledge of the newest art and theory, and his comprehensive understanding of classic art and ancient civilizations. It is rare to find a writer equally fluent in the production of modernist aesthetics, the anti-aesthetics of post-modernism, T'ang Dynasty Taoist painting, the doctrines of the Tantra, Platonic mysticism, and Aristotelian logic. This vast knowledge has enabled him to produce some of the best-conceived and eccentric
Thomas McEvilley is a professor at the School of Visual Arts in New York City, where he heads the department of Art Criticism and Writing. Previously, he taught at Rice University in Houston, Texas. McEvilley holds a Ph.D. in classical philology. In addition to Greek and Latin, he has studied Sanskrit and has taught numerous courses on Greek and Indian culture, history of religion and philosophy, and art. He has published countless scholarly monographs and articles on early Greek poetry, philosophy, and religion, including the monumental study, The Shape of Ancient Thought: Comparative Studies in Greek and Indian Philosophies (2002).
G. Roger Denson brings singular insight to Thomas McEvilley's writings. As a cultural critic who contributed to ART IN AMERICA, PARKETT, ARTSCRIBE, Duke University's CULTURAL POLITICS and HUFFINGTON POST, he has explored similar territory as McEvilley, but from the point of view of a nomadic ideologist. His approach matches that of his subject. He addresses the issues of pragmatism, historicism, and cultural relativism. In so doing, he effectively dismantles the need to establish a master narrative. The contrast and agreement between these two writers constitutes a mapping of the terrain of contemporary culture.