Human beings attempt to better understand something new and unusual by making comparisons with already known concepts. The book “Chinese Landscape Painting as Western Art History” offers a reflection on Chinese art through the prism of Western art. Such an approach harms both Western and Chinese art. Elkins conducted a qualitative study of a large number of publications by prominent 20th-century Western art historians focusing on Chinese art. His analysis of these publications revealed inefficiencies associated with applying the Western art historical method to understanding the art of other non-Western cultures. Publications were biased toward descriptions provided by Western art that misrepresented Chinese landscape paintings. Furthermore, the present study of art history has adopted a Westernized viewpoint in its understanding of unfamiliar art. To review the book, it is necessary to determine whether the application of Western methods of art analysis is productive and appropriate. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay Elkins' ideologies focus on presenting and understanding art beyond Western traditions. In his introductory segment, the author acknowledges that using Western art to understand the art of non-Western art history undermines them. As a foreigner with little command of the Chinese language and a deeper understanding of Chinese culture, we are deprived of the opportunity to draw informed and relevant conclusions about Chinese art. The author notes that many scholars of Chinese art will view him as lacking the desired basic knowledge of Chinese art, which deprives him of the skill needed to understand and vividly present Chinese art . The author's premises regarding the interpretation of Chinese art tend to refute the previous interpretations of art historians. He notes that "the history of Western art is deeply intertwined with the enterprise of art history itself, so much so that the history of Chinese landscape painting tends to appear as an example or as a set of possible examples, and not as a co-equal example. in the production or understanding of art history itself.” This reveals the insignificance given to Chinese art. Although it is assumed that the interpretations aim to provide an understanding of Chinese art, they do so without offering meaningful information. Art history is based on a set of rules that guide comparisons between known and unknown artistic styles and periods. However, these rules are heavily biased in favor of Western art. When used to provide insight into artistic styles from non-Western culture, such as Chinese art, they fail to present the art accurately. However, the author argues for the feasibility and continued use of comparisons with current art that is not originally Western. He notes that “the question is how it is possible, within a given disciplinary practice, to manage the comparisons that continue to give us our art and our history. There is a moral to be learned, I think, from not running away from comparisons.” . This transcription simply advocates the use of similes to gain insight into an art that is unfamiliar. He considers it the only viable and respectful approach to better understand an unknown art. However, it must be carried out in a manner.