The Slide Lecture, or the Work of Art "History" in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction

2000 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 414-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert S. Nelson
Keyword(s):  
Art History ◽  
Work Of Art ◽  
Mechanical Reproduction

Conditions of Visibility

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Art History ◽  
Visual Art ◽  
Fundamental Question ◽  
Ancient World ◽  
Work Of Art ◽  
History Of Art ◽  
Shared Objects ◽  
History Of ◽  
Modern Prejudice ◽  
Historical Past

We often assume that works of visual art are meant to be seen. Yet that assumption may be a modern prejudice. The ancient world - from China to Greece, Rome to Mexico - provides many examples of statues, paintings, and other images that were not intended to be visible. Instead of being displayed, they were hidden, buried, or otherwise obscured. In this third volume in the Visual Conversations in Art & Archaeology series, leading scholars working at the intersection of archaeology and the history of art address the fundamental question of art's visibility. What conditions must be met, what has to be in place, for a work of art to be seen at all? The answer is both historical and methodological; it concerns ancient societies and modern disciplines, and encompasses material circumstances, perceptual capacities, technologies of visualization, protocols of classification, and a great deal more. The emerging field of archaeological art history is uniquely suited to address such questions. Intrinsically comparative, this approach cuts across traditional ethnic, religious, and chronological categories to confront the academic present with the historical past. The goal is to produce a new art history that is at once cosmopolitan in method and global in scope, and in doing so establish new ways of seeing - new conditions of visibility - for shared objects of study.

scholarly journals A descriptive mode in art and the issue of a representation

2020 ◽  
pp. 11-17
Author(s):  
O. V. Bezzubova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Visual Culture ◽  
Art History ◽  
American Art ◽  
Pictorial Representation ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Work Of Art ◽  
Culture Studies ◽  
Visual Culture Studies ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
New Research

The predominant for XX century art studies tradition was seriously reconsidered during the 1970– 1980s during the so called «new art history» development, when many received concepts were called into question. A notion of descriptiv e mode of painting proposed by an American art historian S. Alpers is of great interest in this context because it allows us to revise the homogeneous development of European art. While elaborating the concept of descriptive mode of painting, Alpers took under consideration a wide range of historical and cultural sources thus contributed to the new research approach nowadays known under the title of visual culture studies. It is not less important that she also focused on the issue of pictorial representation, which inquires the essence of the work of art.

1. What is art history?

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Dana Arnold
Keyword(s):  
Art History ◽  
Art Criticism ◽  
Art Appreciation ◽  
Cultural Issues ◽  
Work Of Art ◽  
Works Of Art ◽  
The Social ◽  
Over Time

‘What is art history?’ discusses the term art history and draws distinctions between it and art appreciation and art criticism. It also considers the range of artefacts included in the discipline and how these have changed over time. The work of art is our primary evidence, and it is our interaction between this evidence and methods of enquiry that forms art history. Art appreciation and criticism are also linked to connoisseurship. Although art is a visual subject, we learn about it through reading and we convey our ideas about it mostly in writing. The social and cultural issues articulated by art history are examined through an analysis of four very different works of art.

The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Production

2009 ◽  
pp. 2325-2336
Author(s):  
Thomas B. Cavanaugh
Keyword(s):  
General Population ◽  
Walter Benjamin ◽  
Work Of Art ◽  
Cultural Changes ◽  
Mechanical Reproduction ◽  
Artistic Collaboration ◽  
Electronic Distribution ◽  
Low Threshold

When Walter Benjamin wrote his famous essay The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction, he shone a light on the cultural changes inherent in technology’s ability to infinitely reproduce and distribute art. One of the important consequences of this development was the democratization of art’s availability, allowing the general population to experience artwork that they would otherwise be unable to access. Now technology has advanced to a point where not only is art’s reproduction available to anyone who wants it, its very production is now accessible to almost everyone, even if the prospective artist is utterly devoid of training, expertise, or even talent. With software-based artistic assistance and low-threshold electronic distribution mechanisms, we have achieved the promise of Benjamin’s blurred distinction between artist and audience. As a result, the process by which art is produced has now been democratized, resulting in legitimate questions regarding quality, taste, and the legitimacy of authorship in a human-technological artistic collaboration.

MacSong: Karaoke and the Academy

Prospects ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
pp. 627-638
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Gray
Keyword(s):  
Original Work ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Walter Benjamin ◽  
The Other ◽  
Work Of Art ◽  
Mechanical Reproduction ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The Press ◽  
New Directions ◽  
Movie Star

When Walter Benjamin wrote this sentence in the 1930s, he had in mind both the new directions of the press, which was opening more and more spaces in which its readers could write, and the new films and newsreels, where “any man today can lay claim to being filmed” (“Work of Art,” 233) and where, rather than actors, “people … portray themselves” (234; emphasis Benjamin's). Benjamin's attitude toward this collapse of the distinction between author and public was ambivalent. Phrases such as “the phony spell of a commodity” (233), to describe the cult of the movie star, suggest his nostalgia for a time when the aura of the “original” work of art had not yet begun to decay. On the other hand, his idea that “mechanical reproduction emancipates the work of art from its parasitical dependence on ritual” (226) pointed enthusiastically to the new technologies as part of a liberationist meta-narrative.

Jan van Gool als kunstcriticus

1983 ◽  
Vol 97 (4) ◽  
pp. 266-283
Author(s):  
Lyckle De Vries
Keyword(s):  
Art History ◽  
The Other ◽  
Reliable Information ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Art Theory ◽  
Work Of Art ◽  
Dutch Art ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
History Of ◽  
Expression Of Emotions

AbstractIn 1750 and 1751 Jan van Gool published two volumes of artists' biographies entitled De Nieuwe Schouburg (Note 2). This sequel to Houbraken's Groote Schouburgh (.Note I) is an important source for Dutch art history of the period around 1700. The author's opinions are not strictly governed by the rules of art theory, nor is he a convinced Classicist. His main aim is to give complete and reliable information on the lives and works of artists. In so doing he cannot refrain from giving personal opinions. These characterize him as a competent art critic, who seems to have had an eye for style and quality. He despises work by contemporaries who still adhere to the Leiden tradition of fijnschilderen (small-scale, highly-finished painting). In his view the composition of a painting is of prime importance in assessing its quality, for it is mostly there that an artist's inventiveness, or lack of it, is revealed. Another aspect of great importance is the expression of emotions in painted figures through their glances, gestures and attitudes. Van Gool praises not only history painters who prove to have abilities in this field, but also painters of genre scenes and portraits. He pays far more attention to a painter's brushwork than his style of drawing, his predilection being for masters with a 'courageous' brush. Relatively little attention is given to colour and light and to the plasticity of painted figures. Van Gool's ideals seem to be summed up in the word natural. The essential qualities of the subjects painted must be made visible in the work of art. A painstaking realism in the Leiden tradition would endanger this ideal as much as a severe Classicism. The observation of reality should not be carried so far that details become more important than totalities, but on the other hand the overall form should not be idealized to such an extent that reality is forgotten.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document