HISTORY of ART
Lectures/Courses
Courses & lectures
The Manifesto Modern Art from 1900-1925
Surrealism Freud & the unconscious
Realisms Between the wars
Postwar Modernism Formalism has its day (finally)
20th-century Modernism The height of autonomy
Middle Eastern Art Identity, land & the movement of peoples
Surrealism Freud & the unconscious
Realisms Between the wars
Postwar Modernism Formalism has its day (finally)
20th-century Modernism The height of autonomy
Middle Eastern Art Identity, land & the movement of peoples
What is Aesthetics?
Aesthetics is the science of preference.
Benjamin had a similar gift for applying abstractions to pleasures [Comparing Hegel's aesthetic theory to Benjamin's]. Leon Wieseltier, "Preface," in: Illuminations, p.viii.
What is the History of Art?
An art historian asks: what accounts for changes in art production? Why does the Baroque evolve from the Classical, or why does Rococo develop into the Romantic? Or, as 'the riddle of style ', E.H. Gombrich asks the question this way, 'Why is it that different ages and different nations have represented the visible world in such different ways?' (Gombrich:1977[1960], p.3). This general query can be explored through one of either two lines of thought: Formalism or Social History Theory.
FORMALISM
If we think of an artist/maker as a kind of 'reporter', what are they reporting? Is it more in the realm of how we see ? If so, then the art critic's primary focus is how the work is made. All the information that we need to understand and assess a piece is contained in the work. The commentator or critic is kitted out with the critical faculties to decode the enigma of the piece and relate its importance to the viewing public. The maker, then, considers the 'rules' of the art form, or how the rules can be broken. These 'rules' are universal and timeless and can only be imitated and re-packaged. The wheel is never reinvented, it is ever only recast or re -presented. A maker of any era works within an artistic heritage. Dissatisfied by simply imitating former innovators, any contemporary set of makers aims to adopt, improve upon or react against the modifications of the past. Art history and production, then, is a continuum. There may be other factors about a work that are interesting, but what is essential to understanding a work is its composition, materials, scale, the rules it follows/breaks and its legacy. If an art historian is using this means of reading a work of art, they are applying Formalism. You could think of it as the 'Sense' in 'Sense and Sensibility'.
SOCIAL HISTORY THEORY
Another means of interpreting the importance of how a piece of art comes about is to examine its contextual location. In this line of analysis, first cause is the social, political and cultural conditions though which the work is created. An artist is a maker/thinker. Their work is an emotional or intellectual response to the world in which they live. Of course, their practice is an artistic one, but here it is what is being conveyed, not how. Instead of relying solely on the aesthetic decisions an artist makes, an art historian of this category would place above all else the importance of the object as a unique and powerful profile of its historical time and space. Certain factors that might influence the creation of a work might be the following: where's the money coming from (the control of the patron)?; censorship; and motivating factors such as gender, race & class. These details of analysis take into account the environment at the point of the work's creation.
At the same time, the work might attract attention and endorsement for reasons other than its own integrity proceeding its creation. A work's performance as a commodity in the marketplace has the potential to increase its value as a masterpiece. To understand a work of art then, the first concern for art historians of the Social History Theory approach prioritise its context over its aesthetic value. It is in this area of study that the most important truths about the piece are revealed. Although we can't put too much emphasis on the comparison, it is the 'Sensibility' of 'Sense and Sensibility'.
THE CHANGING FACE OF VENUS THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY OF ART
Here is a composite of various representations of Venus through art history. These examples are well-known portrayals of the goddess from different art history eras: Ancient, Classical, Renaissance, Baroque, Modern, and Surreal. The artists seem to be evoking a range of expressions from reverence, appreciation and beauty to irony, disgust and mockery. How can we make sense of these widely dissimilar images?
FORMALISM
If we think of an artist/maker as a kind of 'reporter', what are they reporting? Is it more in the realm of how we see ? If so, then the art critic's primary focus is how the work is made. All the information that we need to understand and assess a piece is contained in the work. The commentator or critic is kitted out with the critical faculties to decode the enigma of the piece and relate its importance to the viewing public. The maker, then, considers the 'rules' of the art form, or how the rules can be broken. These 'rules' are universal and timeless and can only be imitated and re-packaged. The wheel is never reinvented, it is ever only recast or re -presented. A maker of any era works within an artistic heritage. Dissatisfied by simply imitating former innovators, any contemporary set of makers aims to adopt, improve upon or react against the modifications of the past. Art history and production, then, is a continuum. There may be other factors about a work that are interesting, but what is essential to understanding a work is its composition, materials, scale, the rules it follows/breaks and its legacy. If an art historian is using this means of reading a work of art, they are applying Formalism. You could think of it as the 'Sense' in 'Sense and Sensibility'.
SOCIAL HISTORY THEORY
Another means of interpreting the importance of how a piece of art comes about is to examine its contextual location. In this line of analysis, first cause is the social, political and cultural conditions though which the work is created. An artist is a maker/thinker. Their work is an emotional or intellectual response to the world in which they live. Of course, their practice is an artistic one, but here it is what is being conveyed, not how. Instead of relying solely on the aesthetic decisions an artist makes, an art historian of this category would place above all else the importance of the object as a unique and powerful profile of its historical time and space. Certain factors that might influence the creation of a work might be the following: where's the money coming from (the control of the patron)?; censorship; and motivating factors such as gender, race & class. These details of analysis take into account the environment at the point of the work's creation.
At the same time, the work might attract attention and endorsement for reasons other than its own integrity proceeding its creation. A work's performance as a commodity in the marketplace has the potential to increase its value as a masterpiece. To understand a work of art then, the first concern for art historians of the Social History Theory approach prioritise its context over its aesthetic value. It is in this area of study that the most important truths about the piece are revealed. Although we can't put too much emphasis on the comparison, it is the 'Sensibility' of 'Sense and Sensibility'.
THE CHANGING FACE OF VENUS THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY OF ART
Here is a composite of various representations of Venus through art history. These examples are well-known portrayals of the goddess from different art history eras: Ancient, Classical, Renaissance, Baroque, Modern, and Surreal. The artists seem to be evoking a range of expressions from reverence, appreciation and beauty to irony, disgust and mockery. How can we make sense of these widely dissimilar images?
READING LIST
Ades, Dawn (1974), Dada and Surrealism, London, Thames and Hudson Ltd.
Agamben, Giorgio (1998), Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, Translated by Daniel Heller-Roazen, Stanford CA, Stanford University Press.
Arendt, Hannah (1979), The Origins of Totalitarianism, Orlando FA, Harcourt Brace & Company.
Benjamin, Walter (1936), 'The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction', in: Illuminations, London, Pimlico, 1999, pp. 211-244.
http://lcst2120.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/work-of-art.pdf [accessed 12.10.2013].
Berger, John (1972), Ways of Seeing, Middlesex, Penguin Books.
Berger, John and Mohr, Jean (2010) [1975], A Seventh Man, London / Brooklyn NY, Verso.
Cockcroft, Eva (1974), 'Abstract Expressionism, Weapon of the Cold War', Artforum, vol.15, no.10, June 1974, pp.39-41.
Danchev, Alex (2011), 100 Artists' Manifestos: From the Futurists to the Stuckists, London / New York, Penguin Books.
Eagleton, Terry (1990), The Ideology of the Aesthetic, Oxford, Blackwell.
Eagleton, Terry (1988), 'The Ideology of the Aesthetic', Poetic Review 9/2, pp.327-338.
Foster, Hal (1985), 'The "Primitive" Unconscious of Modern Art', October, 34, Fall, pp.45-70.
Greenberg, Clement (1939), ‘Avant-garde and Kitsch’, Artisan Review.
http://www.sharecom.ca/greenberg/kitsch.html [accessed 24.03.13].
Pollock, Griselda (1988), Vision and Difference: Feminism, Femininity and Histories of Art, Abingdon and New York, Routledge.
Scruton, Roger (2012), 'The Great Swindle', Aeon, 12th December 2012.
http://www.aeonmagazine.com/world-views/roger-scruton-fake-culture/ [accessed 23.03.2013].
Scruton, Roger (2009), Beauty, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Stallabrass, Julian (1990), 'The Idea of the Primitive: British Art and Anthropology 1918-1930', New Left Review, no. 183, September-October, pp. 95-115. The Idea of the Primitive: British Art and Anthropology 1918–1930.