Unless things are completely different on the West Coast, I conclude that you must have been talking to CBI'ers or something. Vasari and Walter Pater show up all the time...of course there are other reasons to mention them besides any contributions to art historiography--I'm not sure that we want to get into the historiography of many fields (talk about getting obscure) unless the figures are prominent not just in that field. Besides, what little art historiography that I've read appears to be extremely juvenile in its understanding of the historical context of various artistic works and periods (this isn't a slam specific to the historiography of art--it applies just as well to legal history classes that I've taken--legal historians tend to have a primitive, facile and naive understandings of the tangential context to their own fields. > I'm interested in how these things make it into the CB lexicon of answers. > I've always found it interesting which books are asked about, and which > pieces of music, etc. I recall wanting to write a good art history bonus, > not name-these-paintings/artists, but art historians. Essentially Ruskin > was the only one deemed question worthy by the more knowledgeable, which is > silly, becauser people like Vasari, or Clement Greenberg are infinitely more > important in the field, and certain contemporary names should be familiar to > any art historian, such as Linda Nochlin or Michael Baxandall. Could be > that none of the people I asked were art historians, but I feel like I > should make efforts to expand the field sometimes. > > -Dan Blim =) > > _________________________________________________________________ > Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:46 AM EST EST