Loading...
Please wait, while we are loading the content...
Similar Documents
The Decorative Arts within Art Historical Discourse: Where Is the Dialogue Now and Where Is It Heading?
| Content Provider | Semantic Scholar |
|---|---|
| Author | Anderson, Christina Marie Futter, Catherine L. |
| Copyright Year | 2014 |
| Abstract | This Introduction and the two contributions that follow grew out of a panel with the same title that Christina Anderson and Catherine Futter organised for the College Art Association (CAA) annual meeting in New York in 2013. Anderson is a research consultant to museums, collectors and dealers as well as a research fellow in the university setting; Futter is a senior curator of decorative arts. They had had many conversations about how the decorative arts were regarded by other art historians. Their meetings led to the impression that there was still a hierarchy in place within the discipline that disadvantaged the study of the decorative, as opposed to the fine, arts. They desired to continue the discussions about this with the wider scholarly community. To put it informally, the panel was created to 'take the temperature' among art historians of the state of the study of the decorative arts within art historical discourse. To the organisers' delight, there were approximately 125 people who came to listen to the papers, and discussion after the presentations was robust and drew in many members of the audience. Thus, the organisers were gratified by the interest in what was recognised as an area in which more work needed to be done within the discipline. Although the organisers take no credit for them, it has been noted with satisfaction that the dialogue has continued with, among other things, a panel titled 'Exploring hierarchies within the historiography of the fine and decorative arts' at the annual meeting of the Association of Art Historians held in London in 2014, and another panel for CAA's annual meeting in 2015 titled 'Guerrilla Approaches to the Decorative Arts and Design'. With the obvious interest in this topic, the organisers wanted to record, in these three contributions, both the content and outcome of the CAA panel.One of the characteristics of the CAA panel was that a term already as broadly defined as 'decorative arts' was stretched to include paintings, a category of artistic production normally thought of as fine art; and ornamental plasterwork, the study of which is usually regarded as an element of architectural history. That art historians working on such topics should have been interested in contributing papers to the panel demonstrates the ambiguity of the term 'decorative art'. While this may be considered an impediment to discussions about the place of the decorative arts within art historical discourse, the breadth of subject matter reflected in the panel proved that there is a genuine willingness among art historians to look at what may have previously been considered liminal material and integrate it into mainstream art history but also, perhaps, change the nature of the discipline itself. How, of course, the discipline may change, and has been changing, has not been a matter of consensus and was a major component of the discussion held at the CAA conference.The organisers were not the first art historians to notice that the decorative arts seemed to hold a different status from that of the fine arts within the academic and museum environments. Indeed, this dialogue has been going on for at least a century, if not longer, becoming especially intense within the last few decades. Michael Martin, in his article 'Relics of Another Age: Art History, the "Decorative Arts" and the Museum', provides a clear overview of how the status of the decorative arts has changed over the centuries, particularly as a result of the Enlightenment.1 He notes, for example, the bequests of Isabella d'Este who left carved ivories to her daughters, a carved emerald to one son and, to her son Federigo, who became the first duke of Mantua, her grotta, while to her ladies-in- waiting she left their choice of a painting each. Martin uses this to demonstrate the very different approach to the value of objects - and relative lack of value of paintings - during the medieval and Renaissance periods. At the time, 'art' referred to craft or skill and an object's importance was determined principally by the monetary value and properties of its materials, the prestige of the commissioner or owner and its social or devotional (or other) function. … |
| Starting Page | 1 |
| Ending Page | 1 |
| Page Count | 1 |
| File Format | PDF HTM / HTML |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | https://arthistoriography.files.wordpress.com/2014/11/anderson-futter-introduction.pdf |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | http://content.ebscohost.com/ContentServer.asp?ContentCustomer=dGJyMPGptE%2BzrLNPuePfgeyx43zx1%2B6B&D=asu&EbscoContent=dGJyMMvl7ESeqLA4yOvqOLCmr1Gep7dSsqq4Sq%2BWxWXS&K=100136642&P=AN&S=R&T=P |
| Alternate Webpage(s) | http://www.collegeart.org/pdf/2013CallforParticipation.pdf |
| Language | English |
| Access Restriction | Open |
| Content Type | Text |
| Resource Type | Article |
