This study of Rauschenberg is a good source of biographical information, and will be useful to those new to the artist's work, but for those wanting to pursue the more complex theoretical implications of Rauschenberg's practice, they would be advised to look elsewhere. This is because Mattison's study takes the form of a relatively conventional monograph, and it doesnt really pay much attention to some of the most interesting literature on the artist by scholars like Leo Steinberg or Rosalind Krauss. Furthermore, it treats Rauschenberg as though he were a canonised "Old Master"- this is obvious from the introduction, where Mattison treats us to a detailed description of the artist's custom-built studio in Florida- the implication being that Rauschenberg is a kind of modern-day Rubens, turning out masterpieces with the help of his eager assistants. However, Rauschenberg's work (especially his early, seminal work), seriously calls into question notions of genius, authenticity, originality, and the like- all those sacred cows of art history. But Mattison avoids these thorny questions, mainly because I think that the book is aimed at a more mainstream audience.
There is some interesting stuff here- the section on Rauschenberg's dyslexia, and how it could help us shed light on his silkscreen printing, was good, as was the section on the development of "lateral thinking" in psychology, which was contemporaneous with Rauschenberg's emergence, and ties in nicely with some of his concerns, i.e. getting away from fixed, preconceived ideas and logical (or "vertical") thinking. Also, the section on New York's urban development in the late 50s was also enlightening with regard to Rauschenberg's combines from that time. There is also a lot of information about the artist's "Stoned Moon" book, produced during his trip to Cape Canaveral in 1969.
Overall, though, its a book to sift information from, rather than to sit down and enjoy- its relatively conventional nature means that its not an especially exciting read, although those new to the artist (and art history generally) may think differently.