DOCSLIB.ORG

Critical Issues in Art History (324)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Fall 2017 Wake Forest University CRITICAL ISSUES IN ART HISTORY (324) Thursdays 3:30-6:30 | SFAC 103 Contact me: Dr. Laura Veneskey e: [email protected] t: 336-758-5081 office: SFAC 107 hours: Thurs., 2:30-4:00pm To read: Required: ✦ Course packet (CP) ✦ Donald Preziosi, ed., The Art of Art History: A Critical Anthology, 2nd This seminar is a window into our discipline, both its history ed. (Oxford University and its methods. We will engage with the questions and Press, 2009), ISBN: debates that have shaped the field of art history, and attempt 0199229848 (P) to understand how the discipline itself is part of historical ✦ Michael Hatt and processes. We will begin by reading foundational, classic Charlotte Klonk, Art texts alongside more recent art historical interventions and History: A Critical debates. Our discussions will focus on points of conflict and Introduction to its consensus among the varied approaches to the study of art Methods (Manchester and New York: Manchester objects in their historical contexts. In the second half of the University Press, 2006), course, we will be reading important theories that have ISBN: 0719069599 (HK) expanded the disciplinary scope of art history (e.g., psychoanalysis, feminism, postcolonialism). Through critical Preziosi contains reading and reflective response, we will not only investigate canonical texts (primary art history’s own history, but also begin to articulate our own and secondary), while positions and voices. Hatt & Klonk provides historiographic essays on major methodological developments. I recommend reading Hatt & Klonk after Preziosi in order to help clarify and contextualize what you have just absorbed. Issues in Art History 1 Fall 2017 Wake Forest University What I expect fom you: Attendance & Participation: 20% The success of this seminar depends on an engaged and lively group dynamic. Attendance is therefore both crucial and mandatory. You should come to each meeting having fully digested the assigned readings and be ready to participate in a thoughtful discussion of the concepts contained therein. Simply being here and speaking up is not enough; your comments should reflect a careful consideration of the texts and issues at hand. If you are uncomfortable speaking in front of others, I am happy to help Assignments & Dates you confront these fears. However, if you don’t participate thoughtfully and consistently, you will not receive these points. 20% - attendance & participation Please arrive on time and be prepared to remain until the end of 15% - discussion game plan class. During class, phones, tablets, and laptops should be switched off and put away. (Read why here.) If you must miss a 30% - weekly response papers class, you are still expected to complete written assignments on 25% - annotated bibliography & time. If you know in advance of an absence, please inform me as final paper (11/9 & 12/7) soon as possible and plan accordingly. Absences for illness, family 10% - take-home final exam emergency, religious observance, or representing the university (12/16) are considered excused with appropriate documentation. Written assignments are to be Weekly Response Papers: 30% submitted in hard copy & to your Each week, you will be asked to write a 1-2 page response to Sakai dropbox. Late work will be the readings (double-spaced, 12pt Times New Roman, 1” penalized 10 points per day (5 for margins all around). There is a short prompt for each week the first half day) - but all work (below the list of readings), designed to prepare you for our must be completed to pass the in-class discussion. Use this prompt as a way to organize your course! thoughts about the readings and then write your response. Papers should be submitted in hard copy and uploaded to Fine Print your dropbox folder on Sakai. You do not have to complete a response paper for the week you lead discussion. Accommodations: I am happy to work with students entitled to accommodations. Discussion Game Plan with Partner: 15% Please contact the Learning Assistance Center (758-5929) for documentation as Beginning in week 8, students will work in pairs to prepare a early as possible in the semester. Retroactive handout with a “game plan” for our discussion; this might include accommodations will not be provided. key quotations from the readings (a few lines that you found Academic Integrity: Plagiarism will not be important or puzzling), a list of 4-5 questions or points for tolerated. If you engage in academic consideration, any current debates that are relevant, and possible dishonesty of any kind, in any measure, you will fail the assignment and risk failing the artworks for discussion. The content will depend on the readings in class. question, but can also include any clarifications, observations, or Emergency Plan: In case of an extended connections among assigned authors. You should meet with your university closure, you are to complete the partner in advance of class to discuss the readings and formulate a reading assignments for the remaining plan. Your handout as well as any works of art you would like weeks of the semester, write a 10-page paper comparing and contrasting two included in the PPT must be emailed to me by noon on the possible methodological approaches to Monday before you present. Weeks and partners will be assigned your object and upload it to Sakai. on 9/14. Issues in Art History 2 Fall 2017 Wake Forest University Abstract & Annotated Bibliography: 5% | Final Paper: 20% Your final paper for this course (~12 pages) involves researching a specific artwork and discussing it from multiple methodological perspectives. Preliminary assignments leading up to this project are marked throughout the semester. Details will follow in the coming weeks. Final Take-Home Exam: 10% Your final will be a short-answer and essay exam that asks you to reflect upon what we have learned throughout the semester and apply that knowledge. You will be allowed to consult the readings and your notes while taking it. More information will follow later in the semester. What you can expect fom me: I am available during office hours (and by appointment) to answer any questions you may have about the course. Additionally, while I cannot read drafts, I encourage you to speak with me about presentations as well as paper topics and content. I do my best to respond to emails within 24 hours, Monday-Friday. __________________________________________________________________________________________________ Course Schedule & Readings Week 1 8/31 – Introduction & Logistics • Assignment: Select an art object that you can refer to throughout the semester during our class discussions and in select response papers. The object should be one you know relatively well and be readily accessible throughout the semester either in person or through reproductions. Please send me your choice by Wednesday, 9/6 at 5pm. Week 2 9/7 – Foundations: Biography, Authorship, and Society • CP: Giorgio Vasari, The Lives of the Artists (1568): “Preface to Part 3,” and “Leonardo,” 249-271. • CP: Patricia Rubin, “What Men Saw: Vasari’s Life of Leonardo da Vinci and the Image of the Renaissance Artist,” Art History 13, no. 1 (March 1990): 34-46. • P: Michel Foucault, “What is an Author?” (1969), 321-334. • P: Johann Joachim Winckelmann, from Reflections on the Imitation of Greek Works in Painting and Sculpture (1755), 27-34. • P: Whitney Davis, “Winckelmann Divided: Mourning the Death of Art History,” 35-45. Response Paper Topic: Compare and contrast the approaches taken by Vasari and Winckelmann. What do the other authors help you to understand about their potential strengths and limitations? Week 3 9/14 – Aesthetics & Philosophy • HK: “Hegel and the Birth of Art History,” 22-39. • P: Introduction to chapter 2, “Aesthetics,” 55-61. • P: Immanuel Kant, excerpt from The Critique of Judgment (1790), 62-79. • P: Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, from Philosophy of Fine Art (1835), 80-88. • CP: James Elkins, “Why Don’t Art Historians Attend Aesthetics Conferences,” in Art History Versus Aesthetics (New York, 2005 [1996]), 39-49. Response Paper Topic: How do Kant and Hegel define aesthetics? How does each understand the relationship among beauty, art, and society? Issues in Art History 3 Fall 2017 Wake Forest University Week 4 9/21 – Formalism & Style • HK: “Formalism: Heinrich Wölfflin and Alois Riegl,” 65-95. • P: Heinrich Wölfflin, from Principles of Art History (1915), 119-128. • P: Alois Riegl, “Leading Characteristics of the Late Roman Kunstwollen,” (1893), 155-161. • CP: Clement Greenberg, “Modernist Painting” (1960) from Clement Greenberg: The Collected Essays and Criticism, Volume 4 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993), 85-93. • CP: Jaś Elsner, “Style,” in Critical Terms for Art History, 2nd ed., (2003), 98-109. Response Paper Topic: Meet with your partner and create a practice game plan for this week’s readings. This might include key quotations from the readings, a list of 4-5 questions or points for consideration, any relevant debates, and artworks for discussion. Week 5 9/28 – Iconography & Semiotics • P: Erwin Panofsky, “Iconography and Iconology: An Introduction to the Study of Renaissance Art” (1939), 220-235. • P: Stephen Bann, “Meaning/Interpretation” (1996), 256-270. • CP: Rosalind Krauss, “In the Name of Picasso,” October 16 (Spring 1981): 5-22. • P: Mieke Bal and Norman Bryson, “Semiotics and Art History: A Discussion of Context and Senders” (1991), 243-255. Response Paper Topic: Compare and contrast iconological and semiotic approaches to art history. Week 6 10/5 – ***Library Session in ZSR 624 – Dr. V. at Byzantine Studies Conference*** ***Initial meetings to discuss final paper topics must take place by Wednesday, 10/11*** Week 7 10/12 – ***No Class – Fall Break*** Week 8 10/19 – Marxism and the Social History of Art • HK: “Marxism and the Social History of Art,” 120-142. • CP: T. J.
Recommended publications
  • The Strzygowski School of Cluj. an Episode in Interwar Romanian Cultural Politics

    The Strzygowski School of Cluj. an Episode in Interwar Romanian Cultural Politics

    The Strzygowski school of Cluj. An episode in interwar Romanian cultural politics Matthew Rampley Introduction: the legacy of Josef Strzygowski It has become increasingly evident that perhaps the most influential Viennese art historian of the interwar period was Josef Strzygowski. Although a decisive figure, whose appointment as Ordinarius in 1909 led factional rivalries and an institutional split, Strzygowski’s work achieved a far greater audience than his contemporaries. This was particularly the case in central Europe, where his work was adopted as a model in territories as disparate as Estonia and Yugoslavia. In part his influence was due to his sheer industriousness and the volume of his output, both in terms of research publications and students. Between 1909, when he took up his appointment at the Institute in Vienna, and 1932, when he retired, nearly 90 students graduated under his tutelage; this compares with 13 under Thausing and 51 under Riegl and Wickhoff combined. As one subsequent commentator has noted: ‘Looking back at Strzygowski’s career with the hindsight conferred by time, the most striking impression is that he was never still, perpetually buzzing around like a fly in a jam jar.’1 The range of subjects his students wrote on was bewilderingly diverse, and covered topics as diverse as Arnold Böcklin, murals in Turkestan, Iranian decorative art, domestic architecture in seventeenth-century Sweden, Polish Romanesque architecture and the sculpture of Gandhara.2 Many of Strzygowski’s students would go on to become prominent members of the art historical profession across central Europe, such as the Slovene Vojslav Molè (1886-1973), who would play an important role at the University of Cracow, Stella Kramrisch (1896-1993), Emmy Wellesz (1889-1987), Virgil Vătăşianu (1902-1993), a leading art historian in Romania, Otto Demus (1902-1990) and Fritz Novotny (1903-1983).
  • The Construction of National Identity in the Historiography of Czech Art

    The Construction of National Identity in the Historiography of Czech Art

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Enlighten: Theses THE CONSTRUCTION OF NATIONAL IDENTITY IN THE HISTORIOGRAPHY OF CZECH ART MARTA FILIPOVÁ A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE UNIVERSITY OF GLASGOW FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF THE HISTORY OF ART August 2008 © Marta Filipová 2008 Abstract National identity can be expressed in many ways by individuals, groups and states. Since the nineteenth century, Central Europe has been undergoing rapid changes in the political, social and cultural spheres, which was reflected in the self-definition of the nations living in this region, and in their definition by others. The Czech people, who until 1918 were a part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, gave birth to a national revival movement in the nineteenth century and eventually emancipated themselves to create an independent Czechoslovakia. The idea of „national identity“ was, therefore, crucial and this was enhanced in many areas of human activity, including the construction of a historical legitimacy for the nation. The struggle for recognition of the historical existence of the Czech nation was also projected into the discourse adopted for historical and contemporary art writing and exhibition practice. In this thesis, I focus on the ways in which Czech national identity was constructed in the historiography of art. I shall argue that the various ideologies which influenced the writers led to an understanding of Czech art as epitomising certain qualities of the Czech nation. At the same time, the Czech nation was presented as highly advanced because of its artistic achievements.
  • Otto Demus, Byzantine Art and the Spatial Icon

    Otto Demus, Byzantine Art and the Spatial Icon

    Otto Demus, Byzantine art and the spatial icon Ian Verstegen When attention began to turn toward the new or second Vienna school, it is understandable that there was a more inclusive approach to which theorists belonged.1 Thus, Fritz Novotny’s work on Cézanne was included in Christopher Wood’s Vienna School Reader, even though he had been a product of Stzrygowski’s Institute and not (the descendant of) Alois Riegl’s.2 Later, it was questioned to what degree he ought to be counted in this group.3 The same issue faces another student of Stzrygowsky: Otto Demus. In the following, I will follow Wood in a qualified way to show how Demus’ characteristic approach to Byzantine art emerged indeed from typical issues descending from the work of Riegl. Due to thaws between the two institutes, Demus’ teaching with Hans Sedlmayr, and his socialisation with Viennese-trained art historians in London during the Second World War, one can see that Demus had become thoroughly ‘Viennese’ in his outlook well before he returned to Vienna and in 1963 to occupy a chair. As I will argue, this makes Demus’ work fit quite well with the second Viennese school of Hans Sedlmayr and Otto Pächt and to an extant Johannes Wilde, to the degree that his work is focused on an understanding of the work of art or monument as a functional whole. Parts and their relationship are understood, or in the case of a lost work, intuited by way of reconstruction. Also, technical knowledge is used to judge initial states of objects so that the universal working of perception will be accurate based on these same givens.
  • To Hans Sedlmayr's

    To Hans Sedlmayr's

    From Strzygowski’s ‘Orient oder Rom’ to Hans Sedlmayr’s ‘Closest Orient’ Zehra Tonbul The history of oriental art historical studies at the University of Vienna provides insights into the academic history of the first half of the twentieth century. It reveals parallelisms with turn-of-the-century modernisms, and it narrates the influence of political and intellectual transformations brought about by nationalism. The field of oriental art historical studies at the University of Vienna does not have a place in the writings on the ‘Vienna School of Art History’.1 Nevertheless, the history of the University’s Institute of Art History was marked by a pronounced division between 1909 and 1933, which led to the formation of two departments, each of which adopted a topical approach to art historiographies, with the Orient on one side and Roman Europe on the other. The Vienna School legacy is perceived to have continued with the latter; the other department, under the direction of Josef Strzygowski (1862-1941), is either omitted or appears as an anomaly. The divide between the two departments finds voice in Strzygowski’s 1901 book, Orient oder Rom, where he contested Rome-centred historiographies and declared his position against the Viennese scholarship, calling it a ‘Wickhoff monstrosity of the Roman imperial art’ (Wickhoffsche Monstrum der römischen Reichskunst).2 Yet, while Strzygowski appears as a single controversial figure in this divide, the workings of the department that he took over in 1909 present a broader narrative of oriental art historical scholarship and its transformations through its other scholars and the scope of its courses.
  • The Library of Professor Cecil Lee Striker, University of Pennsylvania Late Antique, Early Christian, Byzantine & Medieval A

    The Library of Professor Cecil Lee Striker, University of Pennsylvania Late Antique, Early Christian, Byzantine & Medieval A

    The Library of Professor Cecil Lee Striker, University of Pennsylvania Late Antique, Early Christian, Byzantine & Medieval Art and Architecture 2697 titles in circa 3635 volumes ARS LIBRI THE LIBRARY OF CECIL L. S TRIKER 1 AACHEN. RATHAUS. Karl der Grosse: Werk und Wirkung. June-Sept. 1965. Preface by Wolfgang Braunfels. (10th Council of Europe Exhibition.) xl, 567, (1)pp., 166 plates (8 color), 4 folding maps. Sm. stout 4to. Wraps. D.j. Aachen, 1965. Arntzen/Rainwater R21 2 AACHEN. RATHAUS. Unsere Liebe Frau. June-Sept. 1958. 155, (1)pp., 88 plates. 4to. Wraps. Aachen, 1958. 3 [AALST, V.D. VAN & CIGGAAR, K.N. (EDITORS).] Byzantium and the Low Countries in the Tenth Century: Aspects of Art and History in the Ottonian Era. xv, (1), 164pp. Prof. illus. Sm. 4to. Wraps. Hernen (A.A. Brediusstichting), 1985. 4 ABADIE-REYNAL, C. & SODINI, J.-P. La céramique paléochrétienne de Thasos (Aliki, Delkos, fouilles anciennes). (École Française d’Athènes: Études Thasiennes. 13.) 100pp., 18 plates. 41 illus. hors texte. Lrg. 4to. Wraps. Athènes/Paris (École Française d’Athènes/ de Boccard), 1992. 5 ÅBERG, NILS. The Anglo-Saxons in England During the Early Centuries After the Invasion. (Arbeten utgivna med Understöd av Vilhelm Ekmans Universitetsfond, Uppsala. 33.) vii, (3), 219pp. 319 illus. Sm. 4to. Wraps. Uppsala (Almqvist & Wiksells Boktr. A.B.), 1926. 6 ÅBERG, NILS. The Occident and the Orient in the Art of the Seventh Century. Part II: Lombard Italy. (Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademiens Handlingar. Del 56:2.) 122pp. 105 illus. Sm. 4to. Orig. wraps. Stockholm (Wahlström & Widstrand), 1945. 7 ÅBERG, NILS.