Abstract
Part of a symposium on writing and the history of art. Art-historical writing is for the most part full of jargon and cliche, impenetrable in its density, analytic and contentious to a fault, and utterly predictable. Art historians are so completely absorbed in their own scholarly procedures, lost in their own habits of mind, that they do not contemplate much on the simple fact that they have cut themselves off from the imaginative tradition of writing about art that extends from Philostratus to Dante, Vasari, Bellori, Diderot, and Winckelmann. What is needed is a sensitivity to the art historian's potential as a writer with the capacity to tell a good story and to describe works of art vividly and suggestively.
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.
