> I MUST know why a "detailed stylistic analysis" is politically
> incorrect. Please enlighten me...
> Thanks, K
>
> Christopher Crockett wrote:
> >
> > Jim Bugslag has rattled my cage and jogged my memory re the location and date
> > of the ancient Louis Grodecki article on Chartres/Bourge glass:
> >
> > "A Stained Glass Atelier of the 13th Century: A Study of Windows in the
> > Cathedrals of Bourges, Chartres and Poitiers," _Journal of the Warburg
> > and Courtauld Institutes_, XI (1948), 87-111.
> >
> > Primarily a detailed stylistic analysis, as best i can recall, and quite
> > a good one, though such methods are, apparently, no longer politically
> > correct;
Well, at the risk of anticipating Crockers, and boring the rest of
the list with art historical methodology, I don't see anything wrong
with "detailed stylistic analysis". It is very often necessary, in
fact, to get to more interesting aspects of works of medieval art,
documentation being so often entirely lacking. But there are - or at
least were - medieval art historians for whom formal or stylistic
analysis was their principal interest, and in general, interest has
shifted towards more socially - and religiously - engaged concerns.
There *are* art historians who, in their misguided allegiance to all
things theoretically correct, quite arrogantly throw out the baby
with the bathwater, and decry the very means by which they might
actually accomplish what they hold up as desirable ends of art
historical analysis, but I most definitely distance myself from this
ilk.
Cheers,
Jim Bugslag
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|