BAXANDALL PATTERNS OF INTENTION PDF
Distinguished art historian Michael Baxandall here discusses the historical understanding of works of art – how we can discover the intentions of an artist living in. Patterns of Intention has ratings and 11 reviews. where I took a Graduate Seminar from the venerable art theoretician Michael Kighly Baxandall. The style. Krystal R. South Art History Methods Dr. Anne McClanan Winter, Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of Pictures It seems impossible to.
|Published (Last):||4 February 2004|
|PDF File Size:||12.16 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||3.80 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Refresh and try again. Open Preview See a Problem?
Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. Preview — Patterns of Intention by Michael Baxandall.
Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of Pictures by Michael Baxandall
Defines and explains various concepts regarding the painter’s intentions in order to provide a basis for understanding of a work of art. Paperback intentiom, pages.
Published September 10th by Yale University Press first published To see what your friends thought of this book, pattrns sign up. To ask other readers questions about Patterns of Intentionplease sign up.
The Art History of Michael Baxandall, Part 2: What is Inferential Criticism of Art?
Be the first to ask a question about Patterns of Intention. Lists with This Book. Intentioon 20, Simon rated it liked it Shelves: I seem to have naturally ground to halt with this one, and I’m not going to fight it. I was interested in this since I have come to be more and more suspicious of the idea that there is any “fallacy” involved in appealing to intentions when talking about art.
Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of Pictures
The idea that such appeals are illegitimate was part of a New-Critical move to establish the hegemony of one kind of reader, and one kind of reading, alone. In fact, we are interested in talking about and experiencing art for any number of I seem to have naturally ground to halt with this one, and I’m not going to fight it. In fact, we are interested in talking about and experiencing art for any number of different reasons; and any number of different intentions on the part of artists may be relevant to what we want to say about, or get out of, art.
I think that basically Baxandall is on my side in this, though he explicitly declines to engage at least, head on with the issues I have just raised. In fact, his use of “intention” is quite idiosyncratic and confusing. Intention is “the forward-leaning look of things,” it is not an “historical state of mind” but “a relation between the object [i. What I think he is doing is attempting to read back, from examining a work of art, to the kinds of historical ideas that determined the artist’s “brief” his term for the task the artist is addressing in creating a particular piece of work.
For ideas to function in this way, as part of our description of an artist’s brief, we do not need evidence that the artist actually thought about them that’s the point of the disclaimer that intentions are not “historical states of mind” but merely that they were such that the artist could have thought about them they form part of the relevant circumstances of the work.
On this basis, we get several case studies, which involve much fascinating detail about the history of the art market, the history of science, etc.
One interesting point, made in passing, was that the nature of art criticism has changed dramatically in response to the different ways in which the picture under discussion was or was not represented along side the criticism. Sep 02, Patricia rated it it was ok. Here, Baxandall attempts to make the study of painting legitimate by the standards of a historian, by attempting to deduce the cultural and historical reasons that a work of art looks a certain way i.
He makes a thorough case for this approach, but he leaves no space for the meaning of a work t Here, Baxandall attempts to make the study of painting legitimate by the standards of a historian, by attempting to deduce the cultural and historical reasons that a work of art looks a certain way i.
He makes a thorough case for this approach, but he leaves no space for the meaning of a work to exceed the intention of its maker–in fact, he states explicitly that he’s not at all interested in reading paintings as “texts” with symbolic or iconographic meaning.
As such, he largely sidesteps the questions of interpretation in which I’m interested, and so, despite the clear style, this book bored me to tears. Likely a disciplinary issue: Apr 30, Jonathan Frederick Walz rated it really liked it.
Rather dense and philosphical—but that’s what I like about it! Not sure I got everything on first reading, but the first section contained some interesting thoughts that can be related to portraiture which is probably why Jonathan Weinberg recommended it to me a million years ago, pre-doctoral.
Feb 19, Ariel Evans rated it it was amazing. The first chapter, on the reading, viewing, and writing of an image, is both brilliant and elegantly written. Probably one of the best analyses of art historical method that I’ve ever read. Jan 23, Robert Lukins rated it it was amazing.
Baxandall places preth century Western art deeply in its financial, political, and historical contexts; his thesis of needing to see the pre-Artist artist; Essential; and he writes like a dream. Jun 11, Yury Akseenov rated it it was amazing. The style of the book its flare come from Michael’s structured thinking based on the linguistics of Latin.
It is one thing to read a book but another to be in the presence of the Master. Someone in the very bureacratic left overs of the California Educational System called the Master a Marxist. Probably because of a rabid politician T.
Clark who ruined a lot of people’s lives with his appropriation of cultural history. Michael was a true sage whose personal sensibility was one of a mystic. Michael is greatly missed. Jan 11, Rachel Nickens rated it really liked it Shelves: Jan 07, Lori Grecco rated it did not like it. Required reading that was painful to get through.
Jul 14, Irene rated it it was amazing Recommends it for: Jul 12, Julie H. A wonderful book for anyone interested in art or art history and how the conventions, symbols, and interpretations change with time. Julee Tanner rated it liked it Jul 20, Jenny rated it really liked it Jan 08, Elizabeth rated it really liked it Aug 01, Kali Bazan rated it patferns liked it May 09, Cathrine Veikos rated it it was amazing Jan 18, Mybooksandlists rated it really liked it Jun 18, Tiago Filipe Clariano rated it really liked it Nov 21, Betsy Konop rated it really liked it Mar 01, Marco Spagna rated it really liked it Oct 28, Ulysse Colonna rated it really liked it Jun 18, inrention Thornee rated it it was amazing May 05, Sophie rated it really liked it Jul 15, Alastair rated it it was amazing Jul 22, Chris Van Beck rated it it was amazing Jun 04, Carrie rated it did not like it Mar 08, Alex rated it really liked it Mar 04, EunHye rated it it was amazing Aug 12, Claire rated it it was amazing Oct 15, There are no discussion topics on this book yet.
Art historian who developed the theory of period eye. Books by Michael Baxandall. Trivia About Kf of Inten No trivia or quizzes yet. Just a moment while we sign you in to your Goodreads account.