In “El nuevo giro de la Historia del Arte en los Estados Unidos,” [The New Turn of Art History in the United States], Argentine historian and critic Damián Bayón criticizes an article by journalist Grace Glueck published in the New York Times that discusses recent trends in the United States. In his text, Bayón exposes the fallacy of presenting structuralist and Marxist approaches [to art] as if they were a methodological innovation that had originated in the United States. Bayón asserts that, in the field of history, this interdisciplinary approach had been practiced in France, and even in Latin America, since the mid-20th century simply because historians from those places were “much more aware of what universal cultural represents.” In Bayón’s view, the book by his mentor Pierre Francastel, Painting and Society (a work that Bayón translated into Spanish), is an excellent example of this. Bayón admits that he was “greatly surprised” by the fact that Glueck mentions feminism as an approach to the study of art. Bayón also critically discusses English, North American, and Swiss historians associated with this “new turn in art history”—figures like Timothy J. Clark, Thomas Crow, and Kurt Foster. Bayón expresses his fear about the wholesale application of interdisciplinary methods in the United States because, rather than enriching the vision of art, they place it in a secondary position by employing only extra-aesthetic paradigms. Bayón does recognize figures who oppose this tendency, including North Americans such as Sidney Freedberg, Robert Rosenblum, Hilton Kramer, Carter Brown, and mostly Susan Sontag, whom he sees as a fundamental figure. While Bayón supports moving beyond “rote” and “routine” teaching of art history in the United States—which he was familiar with thanks to the ten years he spent in that country teaching from an interdisciplinary perspective—he denies that that approach is innovative and fears its extra-artistic radicalization.