Abstract
Abstract Since the renewal of critical interest in the intellectual origins of Art History, a growing body of scholarship has emerged within the last 30 or so years focusing on the writings of Alois Riegl.2 Yet while the importance of Riegl has been recognized, a significant problem nevertheless remains, namely, that of deciding how to approach the texts in question. As Michel Podro asks, 'what kind of commentary are we to construct upon a literature ... if we no longer believe in its theories?3 From the various possible types of approach the most popular amongst the most recent commentators has been to stress the specific relevance of Riegl to contemporary art theoretical interest, and hence his often stated goal of establishing a ‘grammar’ of the visual arts, for example, has been assimilated to semiotics and the post-structuralist paradigm, while his comments on the spectator in Dutch painting have been interpreted as prefiguring the debate around ‘theatricality’ raised by Fried in the 1960s.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
