What do you think?
Rate this book
The Art of Protest: Culture and Activism from the Civil Rights Movement to the Streets of Seattle
Imagine the civil rights movement without freedom songs and the politics of women's movements without poetry. Or, more difficult yet, imagine an America unaffected by the cultural expressions and forms of the twentieth-century social movements that have shaped our nation. The first broad overview of social movements and the distinctive cultural forms that express and helped shape them, The Art of Protest shows the vital importance of these movements to American culture. In comparative accounts of movements beginning with the African American civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s and running through the Internet-driven movement for global justice ("Will the revolution be cybercast?") of the twenty-first century, T. V. Reed enriches our understanding of protest and its cultural expression. Reed explores the street drama of the Black Panthers, the revolutionary murals of the Chicano movement, the American Indian Movement's use of film and video, rock music and the struggles against famine and apartheid, ACT UP's use of visual art in the campaign against AIDS, and the literature of environmental justice. Throughout, Reed employs the concept of culture in three interrelated ways: by examining social movements as sub- or countercultures; by looking at poetry, painting, music, murals, film, and fiction in and around social movements; and by considering the ways in which the cultural texts generated by resistance movements have reshaped the contours of the wider American culture. The United States is a nation that began with a protest. Through the kaleidoscopic lens of artistic and cultural expression, Reed reveals how activism continues to remake our world.
388 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2005
31 people are currently reading
290 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
September 29, 2018
Highly decorated scholar T V Reed has spent decades studying culture, politics and activism in America. His second book, The Art of Protestis a well thought out, intricate study of the influence art has had on activism over the years. The book focuses on social movements, which he defines as, “… the unauthorized, unofficial, anti-institutional, collective action of ordinary citizens trying to change their world.”(Pg. i) The premise of the book is that America is shaped by activism, and activism is greatly influenced by art.
From cover to cover it reads like a textbook. Each chapter, except the final one, discusses a social movement. They are arranged in chronological order beginning with the influence of gospel music on the early Civil Rights movement and ending with modern media culture and the worldwide movement against corporate globalization. All of his points are supported by a level of research and analysis that can only be achieved through decades of work. To me, this is where the book commands respect. He tells the story with such an academic accuracy that it’s easy to find yourself in awe of the knowledge. There are many points in the reading where it is downright overwhelming.
Make no mistake; this is not a book about hippies singing anti-war songs around a campfire. This book provides factual analysis of each movement and how it was influenced by art as well as what art the movement itself influenced. He’s careful to point out that he is just an observer and is giving the perspective of an observer, but it is clear from the beginning that his knowledge level is not that of the casual observer. Nor is he painting all of the protests with the same light; in chapter 6 he takes “charity rock” to task for being disingenuous and poorly executed. Reed says of the two biggest “charity rock” albums of the 80s, “Taken together, these two records could be said to add up to this message, ‘We’ [in the West] are the world, and ‘they’ [in Africa] don’t even know it’s Christmas.” (Pg. 161) He goes on to deconstruct the movement down to its core atoms and criticize it for failing to focus its power where it really counts, on the governments that allowed Apartheid. However, he is fair. He praises the movement for the astonishing amount of money it raised. He also doesn’t shy away from showing support for the movements he feels were better organized and more successful. He writes with zeal when describing the activist group ACT UP and the bold methods used to increase AIDS awareness in the shadow of Reaganites and the conservative political machine of the 80s. Sadly, this is one of the few chapters of the book where he displays any passion.
The final chapter is “Reflections on the Cultural Study of Social Movements.” Here he finishes up his academic analysis of culture, art and social movements. Again, the level of knowledge is staggering and his ability to break something so large down to a logical process is brilliant.
I have little criticism for the structure of this book. The writing is great. It has a natural flow that makes it an easy read, which is good because I had to read some parts several times to understand them. I think the title could be considered misleading. One might think a book about activism, art and culture would be written with some kind of passion, whereas Reed’s take is purely factual. It is a sterile, matter-of-fact look at how art and culture have shaped American activism.
At the end of the day, this is an excellent textbook. If you have to write a paper on the structure of protest, activism and culture, this is the book for you. I doubt there is a better one in circulation. However, if you want to know what it’s like to protest, if you desire to know what it feels like to have so much passion for a cause that you need to push back against the establishment, then I suggest you look elsewhere.
From cover to cover it reads like a textbook. Each chapter, except the final one, discusses a social movement. They are arranged in chronological order beginning with the influence of gospel music on the early Civil Rights movement and ending with modern media culture and the worldwide movement against corporate globalization. All of his points are supported by a level of research and analysis that can only be achieved through decades of work. To me, this is where the book commands respect. He tells the story with such an academic accuracy that it’s easy to find yourself in awe of the knowledge. There are many points in the reading where it is downright overwhelming.
Make no mistake; this is not a book about hippies singing anti-war songs around a campfire. This book provides factual analysis of each movement and how it was influenced by art as well as what art the movement itself influenced. He’s careful to point out that he is just an observer and is giving the perspective of an observer, but it is clear from the beginning that his knowledge level is not that of the casual observer. Nor is he painting all of the protests with the same light; in chapter 6 he takes “charity rock” to task for being disingenuous and poorly executed. Reed says of the two biggest “charity rock” albums of the 80s, “Taken together, these two records could be said to add up to this message, ‘We’ [in the West] are the world, and ‘they’ [in Africa] don’t even know it’s Christmas.” (Pg. 161) He goes on to deconstruct the movement down to its core atoms and criticize it for failing to focus its power where it really counts, on the governments that allowed Apartheid. However, he is fair. He praises the movement for the astonishing amount of money it raised. He also doesn’t shy away from showing support for the movements he feels were better organized and more successful. He writes with zeal when describing the activist group ACT UP and the bold methods used to increase AIDS awareness in the shadow of Reaganites and the conservative political machine of the 80s. Sadly, this is one of the few chapters of the book where he displays any passion.
The final chapter is “Reflections on the Cultural Study of Social Movements.” Here he finishes up his academic analysis of culture, art and social movements. Again, the level of knowledge is staggering and his ability to break something so large down to a logical process is brilliant.
I have little criticism for the structure of this book. The writing is great. It has a natural flow that makes it an easy read, which is good because I had to read some parts several times to understand them. I think the title could be considered misleading. One might think a book about activism, art and culture would be written with some kind of passion, whereas Reed’s take is purely factual. It is a sterile, matter-of-fact look at how art and culture have shaped American activism.
At the end of the day, this is an excellent textbook. If you have to write a paper on the structure of protest, activism and culture, this is the book for you. I doubt there is a better one in circulation. However, if you want to know what it’s like to protest, if you desire to know what it feels like to have so much passion for a cause that you need to push back against the establishment, then I suggest you look elsewhere.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 24, 2013
It was difficult to read because of the seriousness of the content matter but it was very informative and moving. An excellent view of extremely important parts of American history. Also great if you are thinking of getting involved in any modern movements or protests as an idea book.
April 5, 2021
I was pleasantly surprised at how informative this book was sampling the cultural contributions to protest, with examples from civil rights, Black Panthers, feminism, AIDS/HIV and environmental justice. Dimensions of mobilizing/organizing, representation/articulation, diffusion/defusion are explored showing the importance of culture in community-building behind a social or political cause.
Corporate greed, government inaction and public indifference remain the troika of mobilizing change through protest, and this book offers some ways to break through.
"Cultural factors of meaning-making are always semi-autonomous with regard to material conditions. In not taking seriously qualities like pride, dignity, hope, faith, self-esteem, and related elements of consciousness, or by reducing them to “merely” psychological or subjective factors, we may miss key dimensions of a movement’s impact. We may also rob subordinated groups of one of their most valuable resources—their ability to see themselves differently from how they are seen by their oppressors" (p.310).
Corporate greed, government inaction and public indifference remain the troika of mobilizing change through protest, and this book offers some ways to break through.
"Cultural factors of meaning-making are always semi-autonomous with regard to material conditions. In not taking seriously qualities like pride, dignity, hope, faith, self-esteem, and related elements of consciousness, or by reducing them to “merely” psychological or subjective factors, we may miss key dimensions of a movement’s impact. We may also rob subordinated groups of one of their most valuable resources—their ability to see themselves differently from how they are seen by their oppressors" (p.310).
November 13, 2023
Forgot I read this. Oops.
Certain chapters are really interesting, but they all feel a bit myopic—it's like T.V. Reed doesn't suspect that there could be interpretations other than his own. I can't speak for the accuracy of other chapters because I don't know enough, but the chapter on indigenous representation in film was really lacking and showed very little engagement with how the apparatus of the industry—namely distribution and marketing—could facilitate or hinder the movement.
As a conversation starter, this book is great. As substantive analysis of different movements, I think there might be less here than it seems.
Certain chapters are really interesting, but they all feel a bit myopic—it's like T.V. Reed doesn't suspect that there could be interpretations other than his own. I can't speak for the accuracy of other chapters because I don't know enough, but the chapter on indigenous representation in film was really lacking and showed very little engagement with how the apparatus of the industry—namely distribution and marketing—could facilitate or hinder the movement.
As a conversation starter, this book is great. As substantive analysis of different movements, I think there might be less here than it seems.
November 13, 2019
The language is so unnecessarily complicated that one begins to wonder if it is done intentionally to dazzle the dumb-minded, and much information is redundant to give an impression of expertise on the subject. If you are going to waste time, don't waste it on this one.
April 25, 2021
Really awesome material, just a bit difficult to read and process at certain times. Might be more of a problem with myself rather than the book, though...
September 1, 2013
This book was required reading for a 300-level course I took in the history of U.S. Pop Culture. (It was excellent. If you’re interested in the topic, other readings included Working Women and Leisure in Turn-of-the-Century New York, The Power of the Zoot Youth Culture and Resistance during World War II, and Goths Gamers and Grrrls Deviance and Youth Subcultures – all of which I recommend.)
3.5/5
I think cultural studies are becoming increasingly important (and being taken far more seriously than they used to) in the academic world these days. But studying culture is a slippery endeavor. There are political records and economic records, but “cultural” records are a nebulous thing. You can glean what you will from population statistics, (in fact, recorded numbers of people doing something is probably one of the best ways to get a sense of mass culture), but culture is far more abstract than a list of known New York governors. Which is why, some might argue, an unfair emphasis on political and economic forces behind history has rendered the historical record frightfully one-sided—like a one legged-man. But what can historians do when empirical data reveals little about the behaviors and ideas of a culture? Culture is not so quantifiable. It’s in the minds of the common people, and when they die, they take all they’ve seen and known with them. Poof goes the past. Even with cultural studies coming to the forefront of academia, history is still that sad one-legged-man, who maybe has managed to get himself a peg leg, because all history is interpretation.
Reed covers vast territory here, starting in the 50s with the Civil Rights movement, and going through the beginning of the 21st century. Each distinct movement has its own chapter, but in stringing these movements together, he makes striking claims about the nature of movements in general: Movements are the result of rigorous organization and daily planning done at the local level; influences, both practical and artistic, build on each other from movement to movement, creating an interrelationship between all movements; because of this, culture is damn important to history.
I enjoyed the way he discussed artistic expression, especially the portion on Chicano murals, and how movements are sites for the production and reception of art forms, which have in turn continually reshaped U.S. culture—feminists and poetry, civil rights and freedom songs, ACT UP and graphic design. Instead of trudging to city hall and dusting off those bland statistical records, we should be looking to these colorful artistic endeavors as primary sources. Well, not “instead of,” simply in conjunction with.
There were a couple of elements that made his critique unwieldy. The whole crux of his argument implies that movements from different decades, with different goals, and members from a range of racial and economic backgrounds, are comparable and interconnected. Also that culture has the ability to form a powerful national consciousness which can affect life-altering political and social change. These are assumptions, which don’t make them invalid, it just makes them assumptions. So take that for what you will.
Other overarching problems may include the structure of the book and the specificity of his choices. Though he articulates the reason for choosing each movement and their cultural artifacts fairly well in the introduction, a hostile reader may find that “art” is not a big enough umbrella to crowd nine different movements under. Readers may also accuse him of homogenization, thinking that his comparing music and graphic art, for example, is like comparing apples to oranges; something may be lost in attempting to cover so many different art forms in one book. The same may also be said of ethnic groups. Also, readers hoping for more historical evidence (besides the art itself) of cultural impact may at times find his argument too abstract and reaching.
This book is dense, and it didn't always hold my attention, but I found his overall argument convincing and his choices intriguing. He says in the introduction, “This is the first book of comparative movement analysis to focus on the cultural dimension of movements." I will take him at his word, in which case The Art of Protest certainly contributes to the field for being highly ambitious, informative and the first of its kind.
3.5/5
I think cultural studies are becoming increasingly important (and being taken far more seriously than they used to) in the academic world these days. But studying culture is a slippery endeavor. There are political records and economic records, but “cultural” records are a nebulous thing. You can glean what you will from population statistics, (in fact, recorded numbers of people doing something is probably one of the best ways to get a sense of mass culture), but culture is far more abstract than a list of known New York governors. Which is why, some might argue, an unfair emphasis on political and economic forces behind history has rendered the historical record frightfully one-sided—like a one legged-man. But what can historians do when empirical data reveals little about the behaviors and ideas of a culture? Culture is not so quantifiable. It’s in the minds of the common people, and when they die, they take all they’ve seen and known with them. Poof goes the past. Even with cultural studies coming to the forefront of academia, history is still that sad one-legged-man, who maybe has managed to get himself a peg leg, because all history is interpretation.
Reed covers vast territory here, starting in the 50s with the Civil Rights movement, and going through the beginning of the 21st century. Each distinct movement has its own chapter, but in stringing these movements together, he makes striking claims about the nature of movements in general: Movements are the result of rigorous organization and daily planning done at the local level; influences, both practical and artistic, build on each other from movement to movement, creating an interrelationship between all movements; because of this, culture is damn important to history.
I enjoyed the way he discussed artistic expression, especially the portion on Chicano murals, and how movements are sites for the production and reception of art forms, which have in turn continually reshaped U.S. culture—feminists and poetry, civil rights and freedom songs, ACT UP and graphic design. Instead of trudging to city hall and dusting off those bland statistical records, we should be looking to these colorful artistic endeavors as primary sources. Well, not “instead of,” simply in conjunction with.
There were a couple of elements that made his critique unwieldy. The whole crux of his argument implies that movements from different decades, with different goals, and members from a range of racial and economic backgrounds, are comparable and interconnected. Also that culture has the ability to form a powerful national consciousness which can affect life-altering political and social change. These are assumptions, which don’t make them invalid, it just makes them assumptions. So take that for what you will.
Other overarching problems may include the structure of the book and the specificity of his choices. Though he articulates the reason for choosing each movement and their cultural artifacts fairly well in the introduction, a hostile reader may find that “art” is not a big enough umbrella to crowd nine different movements under. Readers may also accuse him of homogenization, thinking that his comparing music and graphic art, for example, is like comparing apples to oranges; something may be lost in attempting to cover so many different art forms in one book. The same may also be said of ethnic groups. Also, readers hoping for more historical evidence (besides the art itself) of cultural impact may at times find his argument too abstract and reaching.
This book is dense, and it didn't always hold my attention, but I found his overall argument convincing and his choices intriguing. He says in the introduction, “This is the first book of comparative movement analysis to focus on the cultural dimension of movements." I will take him at his word, in which case The Art of Protest certainly contributes to the field for being highly ambitious, informative and the first of its kind.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews