Marisa Olson has a very thoughtful response to the review at Rhizome.

In this quote she responds to Pall Thayer’s remarks.

Now I don’t want to personally attack Sarah Boxer (though she is very much worth taking the time to Google!), but I know that she has a background in psychoanalytic theory and I find it unfortunate that her reading in a science of interpretation has not parlayed into interpretations of art. As is true of her other articles recently discussed here, I think that this was, ultimately, a missive rather than a review. (Again, Palli said it all.) She doesn’t adequately discuss the experience of the pieces, though the intended experiences were, in many senses, constitutive of the works. She says, simply, that she doesn’t have time for them.

It’s a good review of the review and I encourage everyone to read the entire thing. permanent link to this post