Lhistorien dart américain James Elkins (Chicago Art Institute) sur comment réinventer lécriture en histoire de lart. Suivre les liens dans son texte sur ses deux projets : Between now and 2016, I will be moving out of art history, art theory, visual studies, and art criticism, and into experimental writing … I wont write or edit any more books on art or organize any more conferences… The most important [reason for doing this] is that art history and related fields in the humanities have long acknowledged the fundamental position occupied by writing, which entails among other things that writing is not a neutral medium, and that there is no secure distinction between nonfiction and other kinds of writing—but few scholars have taken writing seriously in their own practice. Art historians, theorists, and critics continue to write along well-defined disciplinary paths. We cite poststructuralist philosophers on the idea of writing, but our own writing continues to be restricted by disciplinary expectations. The few authors who permit their writing to become more experimental (such as Barthes, Derrida, John Berger, or Hélène Cixous) tend to have their texts viewed as sources for art history, rather than examples of art history. One result of this is a deep disparity between the ways writing is taught and interpreted inside and outside art history. Art history, visual studies, and related fields have virtually no discourse on what might make writing interesting or challenging: we mainly praise writers who are clear, or remark on those who arent. Meanwhile, just outside our disciplines in literary history and criticism, there is a rich literature on writing, with a complex history and an enormous repertoire of strategies for reading texts. Within art history, it is as if none of that ever happened. jameselkins/index.php/component/content/article/16-vita/258-writing-schedule
Posted on: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 09:17:28 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015