Decoding Intricate Illusion

Analyzing Scholarly Secondary Sources

"[T]he past, like the present, is complex, sloppy, and contradictory; our understanding of history as an easily consumable narrative is often an intricate illusion"

𑁋 Bridget R. Cooks, Ph.D, Intricate Illusion

To properly interpret and analyze a scholarly secondary source, I often read the text twice. I believe the first reading should be a casual and uncritical once-over. Before reading, I try to excite myself about the topic so that I can engage with the text more and follow it closely. The first reading is meant to gain a basic understanding of the secondary source, and what primary source it is discussing. When I come upon a phrase, word, or proper name that I don’t know, I’ll skim through the next couple of sentences to see if the information is necessary for a continued understanding of the text, or if I can infer its meaning from the context of the passage. If I’m unable to find the meaning of the unknown subject, but the rest of the text makes sense, I’ll often jot the word down or highlight it on a PDF or Google Doc so that I can review later. However, if I find that the unknown word is central to understanding the text, I’ll immediately search for its definition online. I do this with the mentioned primary sources, and any other works referenced in relation to the primary source.

After this first encounter, I’ll look up all that I’ve highlighted. Examining the primary source, even if it’s just skimming over it, is essential to gain a better insight to the author’s argument, as well as bring the subject back down to earth. Often when I read scholarly sources, the discussions can seem so abstract that it’s hard for me to envision the primary source in question. I think that viewing the primary piece itself also allows for you to begin to make your own interpretations beyond that of the secondary source, and lets you begin to more critically interpret the secondary source. Additionally, you are able to interact with the primary text from a place with more background. You may notice a deeper meaning that you would have originally.

Using Dr. Bridget Cooks’ essay Intricate Illusion as an example, first I’d read over the text, write down any unknown phrases, people, or things, then scroll to the bottom of the PDF (or flip to page nine of the pamphlet), and observe the specific pieces discussed in the text. I like to take time to savor the images, to see how information from commentary text has influenced how I view the primary source. Seeing as Kaphar’s artwork is striking in both illustration and physical (de)construction, it’s rather enjoyable. If I take a liking to one of the primary sources, I’ll open a new tab devoted to it so I can look at it later when I’ve finished analyzing the secondary source. The paintings depicted in this article are two of my favorites from the exhibition catalogue.

Once I've understood what the text says in the first reading, the secondary reading allows me to understand how the text makes its point. If I haven’t already pulled out my notebook, or used the commenting feature on Google Docs, I’ll utilize one to record my observations as I re-read. This is where I begin to take note of the main rhetorical “moves” the author employs.

Seeing as I had a PDF version of Intricate Illusion, I found it easier to take notes by hand. Looking back on these notes, I believe recorded more than necessary, but the notes served the purpose I wanted them to: I could write down the phrases, words, art and artists that I wanted to look up after I was finished reading. I highlighted notes that were connected, such as blue for paintings using or referencing a veil, or green for mentions of "intricate illusion."

The Preacher's Wife, Titus Kaphar, 2010

Above: Notes during my first readthrough.

A rhetorical feature worth noting is the consistent use of imagery and juxtaposition. For instance, when Cooks describes paintings Father and Son and Ishmael, His Mother, and His Grandfather, she begins by describing how the artwork appears as a typical painting at first glance, then using a transition such as “upon closer view it becomes evident…” to point out the physical change Kaphar has made on his canvas (Cooks 6). It is like a double-take; first you see an unassuming painting, now you see a new innovative twist by Kaphar. Dynamic words to describe the alteration of the canvas such as “cutting, smashing, [and] repainting” dramatizes the art and creates intrigue (Cooks 5). Further comparisons between the old-time European style art Kaphar mimics, and the pieces he actually produces are also meant to portray Kaphar’s art as progressive and radical.

Crucial to understanding a scholarly text is its intended audience. You can typically guess at a secondary source’s audience by the primary piece it discusses, the vocabulary and tone used, and the context in which it was published. In the case of Intricate Illusion, the intended audience is not explicitly stated, but it can be inferred that the audience are attendees of an art exhibition. The text is part of an exhibition catalog titled “Classical Disruption”, and as such is meant to give viewers insight to the art show. In fact, though Cooks’ writing is rich with historical and artistic information, all of it is meant as an explanation of the art to the attendees. These attendees are assumed to be educated in artistic creators and techniques, as can be seen in Cooks’ use of artistic jargon such as “contrapposto,” “odalisque”, and “pietà” (Cooks 4, 7). Her references to artists likely not known by the general public, including John Chamberlain, Lucio Fontana, and de Kooning, also suggest an artistically wise audience (Cooks 6).

Above: Notes I took during the second reading. I tried recording how the author was writing, not just the content of what they wrote.

Conversation Between Paintings #1: Descending From the Cross to be Nourished at the Breast of Our Mother, 2006-7

While the purpose of the essay may seem utilitarian at first, within a few paragraphs of the essay, a scholarly claim is made that shapes the rest of the essay. The text begins by immediately diving into a description of Kaphar’s Father and Son, with no introductory paragraph about Kaphar or the exhibition. Instead, the first few paragraphs provide an in depth explanation of the piece and all the historic influences on it. In fact, most of the essay is like this, structured around direct descriptions of specific primary works of art. However, there is a break in this structure in the third and fourth paragraphs. This should be enough to tell a reader that this section must be significant in some way, because the writer felt the need to break the flow of their writing.

Like any good thesis, the claim in Intricate Illusion is multiple sentences, so it was a little tricky to pull out a specific sentence. However, I will say that the end of the third paragraph on page five is particularly insightful. Here, Cooks establishes that:

"The persistent change in Kaphar's work mimics the revelation of inherited narratives within personal and collective points of view."

This is on theme with many of the key words in this essay. Kaphar’s art focuses on history and the multiple perspectives from which it was experienced, and throughout the essay variations of the word “perspective” and “point of view” are present. Cooks then goes further by claiming,

"Kaphar shows us that these stories are constructed as deceptively simple truths: the past, like the present, is complex, sloppy, and contradictory; our understanding of history as an easily consumable narrative is often an intricate illusion."

Note the use of the titular phrase “intricate illusion” in the quote above. This acts as convincing evidence that the sentence is the scholarly thesis of the piece. If a writer names their text after a certain phrase in the text, it is likely because the phrase encapsulates the idea that the author feels is the most critical in their paper. Here, the phrase Intricate Illusion has two connotations. The most obvious meaning is provided in the sentence it is used in; the intricate illusion is that history is the simple, single-sided narrative we are originally brought up with. Kaphar’s aim is to expose that narrative as incomplete, as is apparent in his works featuring Black subjects. However, Intricate Illusion also references the duality of Kaphar’s art, the visual tricks first played on the viewer, such as the use of canvas for a baby’s blanket in Father and Son. Cooks cleverly ties together the Eurocentric false narrative, and Kaphar’s artistic undertaking to dismantle it.

Works Cited:

Kaphar, Titus, et al. “Intricate Illusion.” Titus Kaphar: Classical Disruption, Friedman Benda, New York, NY, 2011, pp. 5–41.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse