Kimmelman

I'm not sure if I missed something or what, but I feel like the title of the article was never really clearly explained. I feel that Stephen Metcalf mentioned the title in his initial letter but there was never any explanation of the title. I felt this was hard to connect with because I haven't read Michael Kimmelman's book. Reading through these is almost equivalent to joining in midway through a conversation. Once you've missed something, the rest really doesn't make sense.

What I did like is even though Stephen Metcalf is (as he says) the farthest thing from an artist he was still able to connect with the book. I feel that if I were to read the book, having close to no art experience myself, I would find a way to be able to connect with the book just as Metcalf was able to.