scholarly journals Jan van Eyck’s New York Diptych: A New Reading on the Skeleton of the Great Chasm

Arts ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 4
Author(s):  
Miyako Sugiyama

The Crucifixion and Last Judgment, or the so-called New York Diptych, is one of the most controversial paintings attributed to Jan van Eyck (ca. 1390–1441) and his workshop. For well over a century, art historians have vigorously discussed its attribution, composition, functional intent, and even its dating. In light of prior scholarship addressing these remarkable panels, this paper focuses on the skeleton represented in the Last Judgment to reveal its iconographical meanings. Specifically, I highlight the inscriptions written on the skeleton’s wings, suggesting that the texts were cited from an All Saints’ Day sermon delivered by the Burgundian abbot Bernard of Clairvaux (1090–1153) who discussed a temporal location for blessed or sinful souls.

2021 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-12
Author(s):  
Samantha Deutch

AbstractARt Image Exploration Space (ARIES) is a free, cloud-based dynamic environment offering art historians and others an extensive array of practical tools for analysing images. It is the product of a successful collaboration between art historians, librarians, computer scientists, and engineers from the Frick Art Reference Library, New York University's Tandon School of Engineering, and Brazil's Universidade Federal Fluminense. ARIES is a powerful tool for art historians, both replicating and augmenting traditional methods they have long-used to study images.1 With the advent of the prevalent use of digital photos, art historians lacked the technology capable of replacing what they had previously been able to accomplish in the analogue world. Wood Ruby and Deutch realized that art historians needed an out-of-the-box solution that didn't require extensive knowledge of other disciplines (computer science and engineering). The result of successful collaborations and a generous donation, ARIES is now available in BETA form at www.artimageexplorationspace.com.


2014 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 38-49
Author(s):  
Flora Lysen

In the 1930s, when the world-renowned Medieval and Renaissance art scholar Erwin Panofsky became acquainted with the New York contemporary art scene, he was challenged with the most difficult dilemma for art historians. How could Panofsky, who was firmly entrenched in the kunstwissenschaftliche study of art, use his historical methods for the scholarly research of contemporary art? Can art historians deal with the art objects of their own time? This urgent and still current question of how to think about “contemporaneity” in relation to art history is the main topic of this paper, which departs from Panofsky’s 1934 review of a book on modern art. In his review of James Johnson Sweeny’s book Plastic Redirections in 20th Century Painting, Panofsky’s praise for Sweeney’s scholarly “distance” from contemporary art developments in Europe is backed by a claim for America’s cultural distance, rather than a (historical) removal in time. Taking a closer look at Panofsky’s conflation of historical/temporal distance with geographical/cultural distance, this paper demonstrates a politically situated discourse on contemporaneity, in which Panofsky proposes the act of writing about the contemporary as a redemptive act, albeit, as this paper will demonstrate, without being able to follow his own scientific method. 


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document