Art
Zeinab Tamassoki; Mehrdad Qayyoomi
Abstract
This paper attempts to extend Ladislav Kesner and Richard Elbridge's insights toward collectivist explanation in art historiography in response to Branko Mitrovic's critique in Rage and Denials. A counterexample situation in architectural historiography is propounded to elucidate how a collectivist ...
Read More
This paper attempts to extend Ladislav Kesner and Richard Elbridge's insights toward collectivist explanation in art historiography in response to Branko Mitrovic's critique in Rage and Denials. A counterexample situation in architectural historiography is propounded to elucidate how a collectivist explanation in a moderate realist form is not only apt but, in some cases, inevitable. It relies on our primary claim, the possibility of some non-essentialist, non-ideological, non-deterministic and non-egocentric collectivist explanations, regarding the main faults assigned to collectivist stances in art historiography by Branko Mitrovic. The Counterexample situation explains the possible actions not implemented and decisions not taken in designing a building. In addition to the choices that led to the final formulation of the artwork, one must also consider the other options available, those possible choices that were left out, to clarify feasible limitations and, conversely, the choices that led to the emergence of the work. Even considering that all final decisions merely result from chemical interactions in actors' brains, one cannot judge alternative options the same way, some of which did not even occur in the artist's mind or the network of agents involved. The repetition of dismissing these alternative options during a long-durée, thus the formation of a pattern, cannot be explained by the individualistic stance proposed by Mitrovic.
Art
Jamal Arabzadeh
Abstract
This research is a critique of “How to use your eyes” by James Elkins. He is an important theorist of art historiography with a critical view of traditional theories about art history. The book's subject is "observation". Elkins carefully observes a wide range of visual phenomena in two main ...
Read More
This research is a critique of “How to use your eyes” by James Elkins. He is an important theorist of art historiography with a critical view of traditional theories about art history. The book's subject is "observation". Elkins carefully observes a wide range of visual phenomena in two main categories: man-made and natural, which have different dimensions: historical, artistic, technological, linguistic, cultural, social or completely natural. He intends to teach correctly seeing. Here, the main question is about pattern forms the book basis and tries to extract his mental pattern by analyzing various book elements. The initial assumption is that the author specializes in visual studies of art history, has indirectly proposed the qualities ideas and how art historian activity dealing with various phenomena in art and culture. Therefore, his writings and basic theories have been explored. The research shows that many cases related to observation can be adapted to activities and different approaches in the historical art research and some of the main views of the author can be identified beyond them. For Elkins, correct observation free from the defined formats is the key to und erstand art history. In his opinion, history cannot be perceived only by studying art works. Observations of other visual phenomena in today's culture can deepen its understanding. Different expertise and knowledge are required.
