The evidence of Bias within Art Historical Methodolgy and the Potentiality of Viewer Dialog as a Pedegogical Tool.
The evidence of cultural and social partiality within the methodology of art history has influenced the manner in which art is presented to the public. The formally structured and often obsolete methods of the earliest art historians continue to influence the telling of art history today, relying on...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Others |
| Published: |
Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University
2004
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/891 https://dc.etsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2048&context=etd |
| Summary: | The evidence of cultural and social partiality within the methodology of art history has influenced the manner in which art is presented to the public. The formally structured and often obsolete methods of the earliest art historians continue to influence the telling of art history today, relying on and emphasizing art historical fact over the viewer's personal interaction and interpretation.
The traditional structure of both the public art museum and art education course rely on the classical methodologies of the past, resulting in the presentation of the object as historically and socially removed from the viewer's own experience.
The role of the art historian should cease to be one of translator, but rather one of facilitator to the artistic exchange. It is through this intentional dialog between artist, viewer and art object that authentic enlightenment occurs. |
|---|