Enfilade

Call for Papers | CAA in New York 2013

Posted in Calls for Papers by Editor on April 16, 2012

The following represents a selection of panels that might be of interest for scholars of the eighteenth century, though readers are encouraged to consult the full Call for Papers. HECAA members are asked to pay special attention to the session organized by Hector Reyes ‘Art in the Age of Philosophy?’ along with an Open Session for New Scholars. -CH.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

101st Annual Conference of the College Art Association
New York, 13-16 February 2013

Proposals due by 4 May 2012

The 2013 Call for Participation for the 101st Annual Conference, taking place February 13–16 in New York, describes many of next year’s programs sessions. CAA and the session chairs invite your participation: please follow the instructions in the booklet to submit a proposal for a paper or presentation. This publication also includes a call for Poster Session proposals and describes the eight Open Forms sessions.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Historians of Eighteenth-Century Art and Architecture
Art in the Age of Philosophy?
Hector Reyes, University of California, Los Angeles, hreyes@humnet.ucla.edu
The relationship between philosophy and art has been a rich field of research for scholars of eighteenth-century painting. Such inquiry has identified philosophical motivations for the pursuit of pleasure, especially aesthetic pleasure, and led to a new understanding of the intellectual foundations and commitments of supposedly frivolous painters, such as Fragonard, Greuze, Boucher, and Chardin. This panel seeks to broaden the inquiry in eighteenth-century philosophy and art by considering a wide range of philosophical and artistic practices. Are there neglected philosophies that might relate to artistic theory or production? How might philosophical approaches help us to rethink the status of other media or artistic production more generally in the eighteenth century? Does an emphasis on philosophical questions occlude or lead us away from important formal questions? Papers that question or interrogate the philosophical approach to art-historical research are as welcome as those that present new research or propose new approaches and methodologies.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

The Decorative Arts within Art Historical Discourse: Where Is the Dialogue Now and Where Is It Heading?
Christina Anderson, University of Oxford, and Catherine Futter, Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art; cm.anderson@usa.net and cfutter@nelson-atkins.org.
The decorative arts are frequently regarded as minor arts in comparison with the “beaux arts” of painting, sculpture, and architecture. Although William Morris wished to democratize art, his writings tended to exacerbate this gulf. The Wiener Werkstätte, Omega Workshops, and Bauhaus also all tried, but failed, to bridge the gap. Today, art history students often encounter the decorative arts late in their careers, if at all. Even among scholars, the decorative arts have become associated with “material culture,” a social science term. This panel will investigate the current status, and future direction, of the decorative arts within art history from a number of different approaches, including material culture, gender studies, Marxism, and semiotics. Are museums better repositories of decorative arts scholarship than universities? Is the term “decorative arts” appropriate, or is it as limiting as “applied arts,” “material culture,” “design,” and “craft?”

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

The Watercolor: 1400–1750
Susan Anderson, Harvard Art Museums, and Odilia Bonebakker, Harvard University; susan.anderson.phd@gmail.com and bonebakk@gmail.com
Art history tends to view watercolor as a modern phenomenon. However, the medium (including gouache and distemper) enjoyed broad-ranging application in a wide spectrum of independent, finished objects produced before 1750. Neither painting nor drawing, and practiced by professionals and amateurs, watercolor resisted contemporary categorization and cohesive analysis during this period of institutionalizing art and its makers. Despite watercolor’s conspicuous presence, a thorough discussion of its theory, practice, and collecting habits from 1400–1750 has been wanting. We seek to re-inscribe watercolor as a significant category in the history of early modern art. Rather than view early watercolors as inevitably leading to the grand British tradition as codified by the Royal Watercolor Society, this session first and foremost aims to place these earlier objects within their own historical, geographical, and cultural moments. Papers from a range of topics and methodological approaches are welcome.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Open Session: French Art, 1715–1789
Colin B. Bailey, The Frick Collection, New York, Bailey@frick.org
Papers that shed new light on individual painters, draftsmen, printmakers, sculptors, practitioners of the decorative arts, and architects in the period between the Regency and the end of Louis XVI’s reign are encouraged. It is hoped that the presentations will also illuminate the range of approaches and methodologies that have revitalized the study of eighteenth-century French art in the past two decades.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Tapestry and Reproduction
Barbara Caen, Universität Zürich, and K.L.H. Wells, University of Southern California; barbaracaen@gmail.com and katharlw@usc.edu
The session will examine how the tapestry has developed as a reproductive art from the sixteenth century, when Raphael’s famous Acts of the Apostles tapestries were widely copied throughout Europe, to the present day, when digital imaging facilitates the creation of almost photorealist tapestries by contemporary artists. Focusing on tapestry suggests not only that the issue of reproduction was relevant long before the onset of photography, but also that the workshop traditions of the early modern period continue to shape artistic production today. This session asks how tapestry’s status as a collaboratively crafted reproduction of a prior design, cartoon, or model has influenced its production and reception. Papers could address the working relationship between designers and weavers, the role of the market, or perceived differences between manual and mechanical reproduction. We invite papers by scholars working in a range of historical time periods and methodologies, as well as by artists who have participated in tapestry production.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Historians of British Art
Parallel Lines Converging: Art, Design, and Fashion Histories
Julie Codell, Arizona State University; Julie.codell@asu.edu
Historians of art, design, and fashion, long separated into discrete disciplines, have begun shared investigations of British culture, often focused on material objects from which radiate a range of topics: domesticity, collecting, museums, gender, consumption, empire, objects’ social and economic trajectories, and social identities constructed through things, among others. Yet, scholars may retain different disciplinary methodologies through which they examine social, historical and cultural meanings of art, objects, dress, furnishings, and spaces. Papers on British visual culture from all historical periods and media are welcome and should address aspects of this convergence, such as (but not limited to) its history in the Arts and Crafts movement or the Gesamtkunstwerk; its appearance as a consequence of commercial or academic changes; its effects on rethinking periodicity and styles; similar objects studied through different methods; design or fashion in paintings; advertising and art history; film costume and mise-en-scene; art and design histories converging in studies of empire.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Imagining Creative Teaching Strategies in Art History
Marit Dewhurst and Lise Kjaer, City College, City University of New York; mdewhurst@ccny.cuny.edu and lkjaer@ccny.cuny.edu
Exciting discoveries and challenging new scholarship in the field of art history are commonly taught in a pitch-dark classroom, in a classical lecture style. This session calls for papers that will address, rethink, and critique alternative pedagogical strategies in teaching art history on both graduate and undergraduate levels. Papers may address a variety of teaching theories that actively engage students, such as cooperative learning, critical pedagogy, experiential learning, and inquiry-based learning. Papers may consider methods that empower students in an active and self-motivated investigation of art history. Finally, creative teaching strategies that explore critical research and writing assignments are also welcome.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

The Darwin Effect: Evolutionary Theory, Art, and Aesthetic Thought
Michael Dorsch, The Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art, and Jean M. Evans, The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago; michaelscottdorsch@gmail.com and jmevans@uchicago.edu
Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution bore a decisive influence on aesthetic thought that was nothing if not diverse. Its impact has cropped up in a variety of places, ranging from the dating of geometric ornament of so-called primitive cultures to Emmanuel Frémiet’s sculptures of entanglements between simians and prehistoric humans and ultimately to the work of contemporary artists. Using the wealth of new scholarship that resulted from the 200th anniversary of Darwin’s birth and the 150th anniversary of the publication of The Origin of the Species as a springboard, this session will examine the impact of evolutionary theory. To that end, we seek papers that examine the role of Darwinian theory in the construction of trans-cultural, trans-historical discourses on artistic practice, aesthetic theory, and the historiography of art history.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Putting Design in Boxes: The Problem of Taxonomy
Craig Eliason, University of St. Thomas; cdeliason@stthomas.edu
When design historians label a chair as “Louis XV” style or a typeface as a “humanist sans-serif,” they are imposing classification schemes upon these design artifacts. This taxonomic approach, which has shaped much of design history, itself deserves attention. This panel welcomes papers that address the problem of taxonomy in the historiography of design, whether through case studies or theoretical reflections. Papers might consider the entrenchment of classification systems in the practice of design studies (e.g., in textbooks and syllabi); might address the roles of industry in both demanding and supplying classification schemes; or might probe the points at which taxonomic systems fail. Looking ahead, papers might also propose new strategies for effective classification (perhaps employing bottom-up semantic tagging in place of top-down fixed categorical schemes). The panel will consider how the intentional examination of the problem of taxonomy can generate insights both about design and about the scholarship thereof.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Material and Narrative Histories: Rethinking Studies of Inventories and Catalogues
Francesco Freddolini and Anne Helmreich, The Getty Research Institute; AHelmreich@getty.edu
This session aims to identify innovative scholarly approaches to inventories and catalogues by exploring these texts as narratives and material objects. Rethinking the role of these texts is particularly pertinent now when digital humanities have fuelled a quest for “empirical data.” Our questions include: What is the role of authorship and who constitutes the author(s) and additional protagonists? How were these texts developed as multivalent strategies? How is meaning produced at the linguistic, semantic, rhetorical, visual, and material levels? Are there sufficient commonalities to regard these texts as genres? How is the reader understood at the original point of production and in subsequent reception histories? How do such temporal shifts impact on our approach? Papers may investigate case studies but should nonetheless explore the larger theoretical and methodological significance of the materials. We are particularly interested in lesser-known inventories and catalogues posing unusual problems as well as exploring a diverse breadth of chronological and geographic material.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Building for the “Common Good”: Public Works, Civic Architecture, and Their Representation in Bourbon Latin America
Luis J. Gordo-Peláez, University of Texas at Austin, and Paul B. Niell, University of North Texas; pelaezluis@mail.utexas.edu and paul.niell@unt.edu
In 1700, a new king, Philip V, and a new royal dynasty, the French Bourbons, ascended the Spanish throne and introduced ambitious governmental, military, and fiscal reforms in the overseas colonies. For the next century, the cities of colonial Latin America experienced a considerable transformation in their urban landscapes. Viceroys, Corregidores, Intendentes, and Cabildos promoted drastic improvements of public works, buildings, and repairs of city halls, jails, bridges, fountains, paved roads, granaries, slaughterhouses, and parks. This panel seeks to examine civic architecture, public infrastructures, and their representation, built for the “common good,” during the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries in Latin America. It also explores the relationship between such public improvements and late colonial identities. The panel thus invites papers dealing not only with architectural history, but also with the history of the image and other forms of material culture.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

CAA International Committee
Crossing Continents: Expatriate Experiences and the History of Art History
Geraldine A. Johnson, University of Oxford; geraldine.johnson@hoa.ox.ac.uk
The history of art history has often been a history of expatriate experiences. Already in the sixteenth century, Van Mander not only read Vasari, but traveled to Italy. The influence of time spent abroad continues to shape the discipline as seen in the peripatetic careers of Okwui Enwezor or T. J. Clark. In intervening centuries, Italy in particular attracted Winkelmann, Burckhardt, Ruskin, Berenson, and many others. From the later nineteenth century, art historians began traveling farther afield, as seen in Warburg’s 1895–96 trip to New Mexico or Sirén’s 1918 visit to Asia. Later, Panofsky, Gombrich, and others fled National Socialism in Europe, with their subsequent writings inevitably affected by their expatriate status. This session explores how such experiences have shaped art history, both what has been studied (or ignored) and how. Proposals on individual scholars, particular approaches or travel to specific countries/regions from Early Modern times to the present are welcome.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Harems Imagined and Real
Heather Madar, Humboldt State University, Art Department,
1 Harpst St., Arcata, CA, 95521; Heather.Madar@humboldt.edu
The eroticized odalisque is a familiar cliché of Orientalist art. The harem of the Ottoman sultans in particular was much mythologized by Western Europeans, creating a lurid popular image rife with misconceptions. The harem became a key trope of Orientalist thought, encapsulating European perceptions of the decadent, despotic yet desirable East. Images of the harem produced by nineteenth-century Orientalist artists are well known. Yet harem imagery both predates and postdates the time frame of canonical Orientalist art; it was produced by both internal and external observers and, in some cases, by and for women. This panel seeks to critique harem imagery and harem discourse, and to reconsider the sociopolitical freight of harem imagery and the symbolic significance born by depictions of women’s bodies and spaces gendered as female. Papers that examine lesser-known works, including imagery from outside the nineteenth century, depictions of less commonly represented harems, and images by women artists or indigenous representations, are particularly invited.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Artists, Architects, Libraries, and Books, 1400–1800
Sarah McPhee, Emory University, and Heather Hyde Minor, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; bookscaa2013@gmail.com
Bernini possessed a manuscript of Galileo’s Mecchaniche and Marino’s poetry. Inigo Jones owned books by Plato and Plutarch. Jacques Lemercier collected 3,000 books, including the Koran; Velazquez had books on navigation and the planets. How are historians to understand the content of these libraries? What kinds of libraries did architects/artists assemble and how did they use them? How did their reading affect their art? Traditional approaches to these questions have followed a bibliographic method, equating the contents of books with the owner’s mind and considering individual volumes as sources in the creation of buildings or works of art. But this approach oversimplifies the historical reality of books and the ways people read them. Recently, the basic constituents of study—author, book, reader—have been revised; with this session we hope to gauge the current state of research. We seek papers that consider artists and architects as authors, readers, publishers, borrowers, and collectors of books.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Interpreting Animals and Animality
Susan Merriam, Bard College; merriam@bard.edu
This session will focus on the representation of animals or animality in Western visual culture from about 1500 to the present. Since the publication of Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation in 1975, animal studies has emerged as an important topic in the humanities. Historical studies, philosophy, and literature have increasingly devoted attention to the study of animals. Yet, arguably, animals are more important in the visual arts than in any field excepting anthropology or the environmental and biological sciences. The extent to which we believe things to be true about animals (that, for example, they think and feel in certain ways) has been informed by images; these beliefs, in turn, have important environmental and ethical consequences. Papers might examine anthropomorphism, or analyze how images of animals shape attitudes about human relationships and cultural practices. Aesthetics is another topic that might be addressed: What type of artistic techniques or compositional forms are used to convey information about animals? The concept of animality itself might also be considered.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

The Art of the Gift: Theorizing Objects in Early Modern Cross-Cultural Exchange
Nancy Um, Binghamton University, and Leah Clark, Saint Michael’s College; nancyum@binghamton.edu and leah.clark@mail.mcgill.ca
This panel focuses on the visual culture of gifts during the dynamic early modern era, when objects of exchange played an important role in burgeoning cross-cultural encounters, long-distance economic interactions, and diplomatic engagements. Its aim is to examine the unique contributions that art history may offer to the critical legacy of the gift, with its anthropological and sociological roots, such as a concern for the visuality of objects in motion, an interest in collecting and display, and an awareness of how objects of exchange may give rise to new social and artistic practices. The panel organizers encourage theoretically engaged papers that represent the broad geographic scope of the gift encounter, locate gifts in dynamic cross-cultural matrices of circulation and consumption, stake out territory within or in response to exchange theory, and/or consider the shifting and unstable meanings of objects as they changed hands across time and space.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: