Letter: Art history deserves debate

IN HIS haste to condemn me, Nineteenth Century Art and what he calls 'the new art history', Tim Hilton ('Toe the line, don't draw it', Review, 13 February) mistook the author of the Goya section. In fact, I am the writer of that chapter, which he praised, indicating that he read the table of contents with about as much care as the rest of the book. Indeed, his review consists of little more than slogans, gainsaying and ad hominems, laced with a few racialist slurs, as when he described Frances Pohl's chapter on Native Americans as devoted to 'the depiction of Red Indians'.

I enjoy intellectual exchange more than most people, and hope that Nineteenth Century Art: A Critical History sparks a good debate; Tim Hilton, alas, appears to have no idea how to conduct one.

Stephen F Eisenman

Occidental College

Los Angeles, California