Preview

Vestnik VGIK

Advanced search

Modern Art History as a Human Science in a Situation of Cultural Turn

Abstract

Intensive development of knowledge in the 20th century,
including the emergence of new sciences and humanities, constantly creates a
problematic situation in the sphere of art, shifting art’s designation to what in
the philosophy of science is known as “normal science”. This is associated with
the idea of art as a science that has reached a stage of maturity and consistency
and, therefore, complies with its norms. The concept of art as “normal science”
is characterized by a certain degree of conservatism, as it presupposes art’s self-
protection against deviations from the established methodology.
However, sometimes the artistic processes of modernity require different
approaches. In addition, the emergence of new humanities shifts the already
established methodology of art. This happened in the first decades of the
20th century, in the era of a linguistic turn in the humanities, indicating the
invasion of natural sciences in the humanities; and this is happening today, at
the turn of the 21st century, in a situation of a cultural turn, the emergence
and intensive development of the science of culture. The current turn requires
a deeper understanding of the structure and components of art history, i.e., its
sub-disciplines: art history, art theory and art criticism.
The essay argues that in the situation of cultural turn the theory of art can
carry out functions which the other two sub-disciplines cannot. It propounds
that art theory is able to make a decisive contribution to the elucidation of two
problems: the relationship between art and cultural studies and the problem
of historical time, which is important both for contemporary art and for art
history.

About the Author

Nikolai Khrenov

Russian Federation


References

1. Bazen Zh.(1995) Istoriya istorii iskusstva. Ot Vazari do nashikh dney [History of Art History.

2. From Vasari to our days]. Moscow: Progress-Kultura, 1995. 526 p. (In Russ.).

3. Vaneyan S. (1999) Mezhdu geshtaltom i teofaniyey. Metodologiya iskusstvoznaniya i

4. metafizika iskusstva Khansa Zedlmayra [Between the Gestalt and Theophany. Methodology

5. of Art Studies and Metaphysics of Art by Hans Zedlmayr] // Zedlmayr Kh. Iskusstvo i istina:

6. O teorii i metode istorii iskusstva // Khans Zedlmayr; Per. s nem. S.S. Vaneyana.

7. Moscow: Iskusstvoznaniye, 1999, pp. 305–363. (In Russ.).

8. Vipper B. (2015) Vvedeniye v istoricheskoye izucheniye iskusstva [Introduction to the

9. Historical Study of Art]. Moscow: Izdatelstvo V. Shevchuka, 2015. 368 p. (In Russ.).

10. Gabrichevsky A. (2002) Morfologiya iskusstva [Art morphology]. Moscow: Agraf, 2002.

11. (In Russ.).

12. Gurevich A. (1996) Istorik kontsa KhKh veka v poiskakh metoda[Historian of the Late

13. Twentieth Century in Search of a Method] // Odissey. Chelovek v istorii. Moscow, 1996.

14. (In Russ.).

15. Zedlmayr Kh. (2008) Utrata serediny[Middle Loss]. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya, 2008.

16. p. (In Russ.).

17. Istoriya evropeyskogo iskusstvoznaniya ot antichnosti do kontsa XVIII veka [The History of

18. European Art History from Antiquity to the End of the XVIII century]. Moscow: Izdatelstvo

19. Akademii nauk SSSR, 1963. 436 p.

20. Istoriya russkogo iskusstva [History of Russian Art], t. 1. Iskusstvo Kiyevskoy Rusi IX —

21. pervaya chetvert XII veka. Moscow: Severny palomnik, 2007. 664 p. (In Russ.).

22. Lazarev V. (1978) O metodologii sovremennogo iskusstvoznaniya [On the Methodology of

23. Contemporary Art History] // Sovetskoye iskusstvoznaniye. Vyp. 2. Moscow, 1978,

24. pp. 311–316. (In Russ.).

25. Le Goff Zh. (2013) Istoriya i pamyat [History and Memory]. Moscow: Rossyskaya

26. politicheskaya entsiklopediya (ROSSPEN), 2013. 303 p. (In Russ.).

27. Prokofyev V. (1978) Khudozhestvennaya kritika, istoriya iskusstva, teoriya obshchego

28. khudozhestvennogo protsessa: ikh spetsifika i problemy vzaimodeystviya v predelakh

29. iskusstvoznaniya[Art criticism, art history, theory of the general art process: their specificity

30. and problems of interaction within the limits of art history] // Sovetskoye iskusstvoznaniye

31. /2. Moscow, 1978, pp. 233–265. (In Russ.).

32. Eyzenshteyn S. (2002) Metod [Method]. V 2-kh t. Moscow, 2002. (In Russ.).


Review

For citations:


Khrenov N. Modern Art History as a Human Science in a Situation of Cultural Turn. Vestnik VGIK. 2019;11(1(39)):82-98. (In Russ.)

Views: 8


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 2074-0832 (Print)
ISSN 2713-2471 (Online)