What do you think?
Rate this book
Disordered Attention: How We Look at Art and Performance Today
The ways we encounter contemporary art and performance is changing. Installations brim with archival documents. Dances stretch for weeks. Performances last a minute. Exhibitions are spread out over thirty venues. There are endless artworks about mid-century architecture and design. How are we expected to engage with today's diverse practise? Is the old model of close-looking still the ideal, or has it given way to browsing, skimming, and sampling?
Across four essays, art historian and critic Claire Bishop identifies trends in contemporary practice - research-based installations, performance exhibitions, interventions, and invocations of modernist architecture - and their challenges to traditional modes of attention. Charting a critical path through the last three decades, Bishop pinpoints how spectatorship and visual literacy are evolving under the pressures of digital technology.
Across four essays, art historian and critic Claire Bishop identifies trends in contemporary practice - research-based installations, performance exhibitions, interventions, and invocations of modernist architecture - and their challenges to traditional modes of attention. Charting a critical path through the last three decades, Bishop pinpoints how spectatorship and visual literacy are evolving under the pressures of digital technology.
- GenresArtNonfictionTechnology
311 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2024
69 people are currently reading
1130 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 - 17 of 17 reviews
December 11, 2024
listen. i get that books like this that rely so heavily on theory and the abstract are intimidating and can be hard to read, i definitely got lost in the weeds a few times with this book. but the subject of attention and how it’s changed over the decades and then in turn how we interact with art and performance is fascinating.
there are moments where Bishop looses me slightly only because art and art history are not strong points of mine, especially contemporary performative art. but Bishop dives deep into social and political connotations of how we think of attention and distraction and is it a bad thing that our attention spans have changed and how does change how we interact with art and performances in different spaces.
her later chapter looking at the differences of political activism and art intervention were probably my favorite bits of the whole book. i would absolutely recommend this book to anyone but keep in mind it’s all theory
“The two terms are not a matter of individual subjective capacities: will power versus coercion, agency versus weakness, intense focus versus dispersed gaze, and so on. Rather, attention and distraction are cultural constructs emerging from a set of tacitly agreed norms and values. Distraction is not opposed to attention but is a type of attention – it’s not individual and intrinsic but social and relational.”
there are moments where Bishop looses me slightly only because art and art history are not strong points of mine, especially contemporary performative art. but Bishop dives deep into social and political connotations of how we think of attention and distraction and is it a bad thing that our attention spans have changed and how does change how we interact with art and performances in different spaces.
her later chapter looking at the differences of political activism and art intervention were probably my favorite bits of the whole book. i would absolutely recommend this book to anyone but keep in mind it’s all theory
“The two terms are not a matter of individual subjective capacities: will power versus coercion, agency versus weakness, intense focus versus dispersed gaze, and so on. Rather, attention and distraction are cultural constructs emerging from a set of tacitly agreed norms and values. Distraction is not opposed to attention but is a type of attention – it’s not individual and intrinsic but social and relational.”
Read
January 9, 2025My parents came to visit us and we went to see a performance of some classical music (including Mozart's 20th piano concerto). We had seats in the back of a box and for the first part of the performance there was a woman in front of us whose perfume was so strong that we could taste it, and then she was replaced by an old man with a cane that he loudly dropped on the ground who loudly rustled packs of goldfish that he loudly crunched; each time we felt relieved that he had finished one pack he stuck his hand in his coat and produced another—I think he ate through four packs during the performance. My dad was really annoyed by this (my mom was more annoyed by the perfume). When they were complaining about it afterward, I told them that they wouldn't like this book that I'm reading, which says that the hyper-focused, silent, attentive style of looking and listening is a late 19th century invention whose time has gone—now is a time of divided inattention, where we look things up on our phones, take pictures of paintings and performances, and generally stop thinking we need to give art objects or performances our undivided attention (which is ableist anyway).
Modern spectatorship, premised on fully focussed presence and deep attention, no longer seems appropriate or necessary (6)
My parents really didn't like that idea (they also complained about everyone taking pictures in the museums we went to, instead of stopping and looking at the art). I think this is indeed an idea worth defending, even if I think it's wrong to give up too easily—I like TJ Clark's remark that “I think writers about art should try harder before admitting defeat” when analyzing artworks and their reactions to them (Clark 2008, p. 118). (Admittedly that's in a book where Clark spends several months in one room in the Getty looking at two Poussin paintings, which is a tough standard to live up to!)
***Reread January 9, 2025—I'm working on a longer review of this***
Modern spectatorship, premised on fully focussed presence and deep attention, no longer seems appropriate or necessary (6)
My parents really didn't like that idea (they also complained about everyone taking pictures in the museums we went to, instead of stopping and looking at the art). I think this is indeed an idea worth defending, even if I think it's wrong to give up too easily—I like TJ Clark's remark that “I think writers about art should try harder before admitting defeat” when analyzing artworks and their reactions to them (Clark 2008, p. 118). (Admittedly that's in a book where Clark spends several months in one room in the Getty looking at two Poussin paintings, which is a tough standard to live up to!)
***Reread January 9, 2025—I'm working on a longer review of this***
March 6, 2025
I knew next to nothing about art and now I know a bit more—how much I retain is tbd.
Bishop looks at the impact of the internet (and social media) and how it has hybridized how we consume art. That is to say, experiencing art today means that our attention is drawn in multiple ways and this includes collectively either with others in person or on our phones/on the web/etc. Artists anticipate and respond to this hybrid attention, constantly creating art that is informed by and informs the times that we’re in.
The writing is remarkably clear and easy to follow, which is good because I only knew about a handful of the example artists and art pieces that Bishop uses, so I had to learn a lot in 200 pages.
Bishop looks at the impact of the internet (and social media) and how it has hybridized how we consume art. That is to say, experiencing art today means that our attention is drawn in multiple ways and this includes collectively either with others in person or on our phones/on the web/etc. Artists anticipate and respond to this hybrid attention, constantly creating art that is informed by and informs the times that we’re in.
The writing is remarkably clear and easy to follow, which is good because I only knew about a handful of the example artists and art pieces that Bishop uses, so I had to learn a lot in 200 pages.
Read
April 14, 2025I love art! 🥲
“Attention is not a volitional state of focus that exists in opposition to distraction, but is a collective phenomenon. It is structured for us by a situation and a set of external conditions (the work of art, performance, exhibition, concert, webpage, social environment), which in turn encounter our internal predispositions and desires. We can therefore analyse how any given work of art attempts to steer and structure our attention - but this success is never guaranteed, and is contingent upon the audience (who may have competing impulses) and the context (poor acoustics, humidity, crowds). As a result, there is no 'ideal viewer', only a flow of possible approximations.”
“Attention is not a volitional state of focus that exists in opposition to distraction, but is a collective phenomenon. It is structured for us by a situation and a set of external conditions (the work of art, performance, exhibition, concert, webpage, social environment), which in turn encounter our internal predispositions and desires. We can therefore analyse how any given work of art attempts to steer and structure our attention - but this success is never guaranteed, and is contingent upon the audience (who may have competing impulses) and the context (poor acoustics, humidity, crowds). As a result, there is no 'ideal viewer', only a flow of possible approximations.”
June 4, 2025
Este libro funciona como un termómetro preciso de los cambios que atraviesan el arte contemporáneo en la era de las redes sociales. Claire Bishop no solo observa, sino que diagnostica cómo han mutado los modos de mirar, participar y producir arte en un mundo saturado de imágenes y pantallas.
La autora despliega con claridad tres grandes líneas de análisis: la transformación de la atención en tiempos de hiperconectividad, el auge del arte investigativo como forma expandida del archivo, y la performance contemporánea que no teme volverse viral. A todo esto, suma una reflexión lúcida sobre las intervenciones artísticas en el espacio público como gestos estratégicos de impacto instantáneo.
Lejos de la nostalgia por una mirada concentrada, Bishop describe cómo la atención hoy es múltiple, fragmentada y distribuida. Desde el cubo blanco hasta el scroll infinito, el libro propone pensar el arte no como un refugio del recogimiento, sino como un terreno atravesado por flujos de información, circulación digital y experiencias híbridas.
Atención trastornada es una lectura imprescindible para comprender cómo las redes sociales no solo transforman la recepción del arte, sino su misma configuración estética, material y política.
La autora despliega con claridad tres grandes líneas de análisis: la transformación de la atención en tiempos de hiperconectividad, el auge del arte investigativo como forma expandida del archivo, y la performance contemporánea que no teme volverse viral. A todo esto, suma una reflexión lúcida sobre las intervenciones artísticas en el espacio público como gestos estratégicos de impacto instantáneo.
Lejos de la nostalgia por una mirada concentrada, Bishop describe cómo la atención hoy es múltiple, fragmentada y distribuida. Desde el cubo blanco hasta el scroll infinito, el libro propone pensar el arte no como un refugio del recogimiento, sino como un terreno atravesado por flujos de información, circulación digital y experiencias híbridas.
Atención trastornada es una lectura imprescindible para comprender cómo las redes sociales no solo transforman la recepción del arte, sino su misma configuración estética, material y política.
January 11, 2025
I’m always intrigued by literature that takes a scholarly approach to art analysis and criticism. Maggie Nelson’s books that take a focus on art criticism (I consider two of her books to fit this bill—she has interestingly called her dissertation Women, The New York School, and Other True Abstractions un-scholarly, and my favorite of her books, The Art of Cruelty) remain my favorite books on this sort of analysis. When this book was published last summer, I was immediately interested in the premise. The meditation of how audiences today interact with art—performance art, particularly—was one that I hadn’t considered, and I was eager to learn Bishop’s thoughts.
Disordered Attention left me with many thought provoking highlights and bookmarks, which have all been a joy to revisit. I found that the introductory essay was the most erudite and focused on the title (and summary) of the book. Many of the ideas and questions she floated I wished were expanded on in a way that was directly related to how modern attention spans (“…normative attention assumes a normative subject – privileged, white, straight, able-bodied, volitional – who confers his attention onto an exteriority thereby constituted as an object.” “When we refer to people as ‘distracted’ (for example, by social media), it’s a way of saying that we think their attention is in the wrong place.”). Deeper into the book, Bishop continues showing suggestions of brilliant thoughts that I didn’t think got the exploration that they deserved (“We need to be careful what we wish for: at one pole, the presentation of information without an authorial voice or position; at the other, a position that can’t be contested, only agreed with.”). I would’ve loved to have gone deeper into these subjects. While Bishop is clearly intelligent and obviously well versed on the art she wrote of, her art analysis fell flat for me as I often failed to see her chosen works as being relevant to the topic at hand.
I overall enjoyed Disordered Attention and always appreciate a more challenging read. It’s somewhat rare for books of this nature to come out that don’t focus on trendy art topics such as how to divorce art from its artist (already an admittedly tired and boring subject). Bishop is an erudite art historian with an indisputable knowledge of the artworks she wrote about. I look forward to other books she writes in the future.
Disordered Attention left me with many thought provoking highlights and bookmarks, which have all been a joy to revisit. I found that the introductory essay was the most erudite and focused on the title (and summary) of the book. Many of the ideas and questions she floated I wished were expanded on in a way that was directly related to how modern attention spans (“…normative attention assumes a normative subject – privileged, white, straight, able-bodied, volitional – who confers his attention onto an exteriority thereby constituted as an object.” “When we refer to people as ‘distracted’ (for example, by social media), it’s a way of saying that we think their attention is in the wrong place.”). Deeper into the book, Bishop continues showing suggestions of brilliant thoughts that I didn’t think got the exploration that they deserved (“We need to be careful what we wish for: at one pole, the presentation of information without an authorial voice or position; at the other, a position that can’t be contested, only agreed with.”). I would’ve loved to have gone deeper into these subjects. While Bishop is clearly intelligent and obviously well versed on the art she wrote of, her art analysis fell flat for me as I often failed to see her chosen works as being relevant to the topic at hand.
I overall enjoyed Disordered Attention and always appreciate a more challenging read. It’s somewhat rare for books of this nature to come out that don’t focus on trendy art topics such as how to divorce art from its artist (already an admittedly tired and boring subject). Bishop is an erudite art historian with an indisputable knowledge of the artworks she wrote about. I look forward to other books she writes in the future.
January 20, 2025
I read the excerpt that Artforum published and was intrigued. Bishop describes four overarching tendencies that she sees in recent contemporary art: the proliferation of research-based art installations; the explosion of performance within the white cube of the museum/gallery; the artistic “intervention” as a grass-roots, independent (i.e. non-commissioned) phenomenon bound up by precise opportune political timing; and the Euro-American obsession with invoking modernist architecture.
Each chapter focuses on one of these tendencies, and she provides numerous examples of artists, artworks, performances and events to argue for their development alongside the sociocultural contexts and technological innovations of their time.
The art and greater culture industries thrive on novelty and chasing trends, so I appreciated her clear analysis of these overarching tendencies that are expressed in divergent practices, materials, and aesthetics.
I was hesitant about the inclusion of the fourth tendency (the invocation of modernist architecture). While she makes a decent case and provides many examples, it felt a bit more like she was cherry-picking the specific reference of modernist architecture when it could have been extrapolated out into an argument about, say, the invocation of historical traumas on the part of contemporary artists to critique the 20th century liberal world order, or historical revisionism and/or recovery of 20th century avant gardes on the part of curators and institutions writ large (I think about Tate Modern’s Surrealism Beyond Borders and the Walker Art Center’s International Pop exhibitions as two examples).
Anyway, I know that those are different projects than what she set out to do, I guess I just felt like the modernist chapter was less satisfying to me personally.
Worth the read if you care about where art has been in the last few decades and where it might go.
Each chapter focuses on one of these tendencies, and she provides numerous examples of artists, artworks, performances and events to argue for their development alongside the sociocultural contexts and technological innovations of their time.
The art and greater culture industries thrive on novelty and chasing trends, so I appreciated her clear analysis of these overarching tendencies that are expressed in divergent practices, materials, and aesthetics.
I was hesitant about the inclusion of the fourth tendency (the invocation of modernist architecture). While she makes a decent case and provides many examples, it felt a bit more like she was cherry-picking the specific reference of modernist architecture when it could have been extrapolated out into an argument about, say, the invocation of historical traumas on the part of contemporary artists to critique the 20th century liberal world order, or historical revisionism and/or recovery of 20th century avant gardes on the part of curators and institutions writ large (I think about Tate Modern’s Surrealism Beyond Borders and the Walker Art Center’s International Pop exhibitions as two examples).
Anyway, I know that those are different projects than what she set out to do, I guess I just felt like the modernist chapter was less satisfying to me personally.
Worth the read if you care about where art has been in the last few decades and where it might go.
October 13, 2024
A very smart book about changing modes of spectatorship that updates ideas about attention and distraction addressed by writers like Jonathon Crary. I particularly liked the first two chapters on research-based art and performance. I read earlier versions of these chapters in art journals but they are furthered developed here.
Bishop has an extremely light touch that enables her to very insightfully weave together art and ideas drawn from extensive research. Her explanations of ideas are admirably precise and concise. A total pleasure to read!
The third chapter theorising interventions is an acute identification of a type of practice that hasn't been identified so clearly.
I would have given this book 5 stars but the last chapter on what Bishop calls the invocation of modern architecture and design was not as sharp as the others. Students often use the term "reference" instead of "invocation," both curious terms for this return/gesture. James Meyer's book The art of return might have been useful here for thinking about return. Nonetheless a well-identified tendency, I'm just not as convinced by the reading of it as a kind of cipher for lost western supremacy.
Bishop has an extremely light touch that enables her to very insightfully weave together art and ideas drawn from extensive research. Her explanations of ideas are admirably precise and concise. A total pleasure to read!
The third chapter theorising interventions is an acute identification of a type of practice that hasn't been identified so clearly.
I would have given this book 5 stars but the last chapter on what Bishop calls the invocation of modern architecture and design was not as sharp as the others. Students often use the term "reference" instead of "invocation," both curious terms for this return/gesture. James Meyer's book The art of return might have been useful here for thinking about return. Nonetheless a well-identified tendency, I'm just not as convinced by the reading of it as a kind of cipher for lost western supremacy.
July 2, 2025
3.5 stars. Interesting, really liked it. A bit structured/written like a sciene paper sometimes, though. I also would have added some things that were added in the 'Notes' section, mostly 11. from 3 Seizing the Moment: Interventions, where the Asian terminology was named and 15. from 4 Déjá Vu: Invoking Modernist Architecture and Design where there's a passage with a really cool quote.
I do think this would definitely need an update soon-ish (things are changing already) because it's balancing on the edge of being timely and in the current zeitgeist.
I do think this would definitely need an update soon-ish (things are changing already) because it's balancing on the edge of being timely and in the current zeitgeist.
December 14, 2024
Very interesting. I dont love her writing, as it is too academic for me and she seems sometimes more concerned in exposing her method than in raising questions. But it’s a good read for anyone interested in the subject and also presents you with very interesting new work. I was a bit confused with the last chapter regarding to how it related to the theme of attention, even though it raised other important issues regarding community spaces and contemporary mode of living.
July 15, 2025
A must read for everyone!
“…attention and distraction are cultural constructs emerging from a set of tacitly agreed norms and values. Distraction is not opposed to attention but is a type of attention - it’s not individual and intrinsic but social and relational.”
“Modern spectatorship, premised on fully focussed presence and deep attention, no longer seems appropriate or necessary.”
“…attention and distraction are cultural constructs emerging from a set of tacitly agreed norms and values. Distraction is not opposed to attention but is a type of attention - it’s not individual and intrinsic but social and relational.”
“Modern spectatorship, premised on fully focussed presence and deep attention, no longer seems appropriate or necessary.”
August 27, 2024
An intellectual (i am)
November 2, 2024
One of the best and most lucid art history books I’ve read about contemporary art. How long it took me to read this relatively brief endeavor reinforced the book’s observations.
July 8, 2025
Siempre es un placer leer a Bishop, una lectura comprometida y una escritura fácil, sin rodeos, sobre asuntos que podrían ser mucho más espinosos en el arte contemporáneo.
September 16, 2025
Definitely very insightful but the structure of the book felt a little incohesive; would’ve loved more development of the digital aspect in the final chapter. Looking forward to reading reviews
Read
October 15, 2025skuchniamba
June 26, 2025
Punching a little bit above my weight with this one. I enjoyed parts but learned that I find reading about architecture and trends in visual art very dull.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews