Enfilade

Exhibition | Andreas Schlüter and Baroque Berlin

Posted in books, catalogues, exhibitions by Editor on April 4, 2014

To mark the 300th anniversary of Andreas Schlüter’s death, the Bode-Museum mounts this exhibition:

Schloss Bau Meister: Andreas Schlüter and Baroque Berlin
Bode-Museum, Berlin, 4 April — 13 July 2014

Bust of Landgrave Frederick II of Hesse Homburg, Berlin, 1701, bronze © Bad Homburg v. d. Höhe, Palace, Photo: Renate Deckers-Matzko

Bust of Landgrave Frederick II of Hesse Homburg, Berlin, 1701, bronze © Bad Homburg v. d. Höhe, Palace, Photo: Renate Deckers-Matzko

Andreas Schlüter (1659/60–1714) was a Baroque artist par excellence. Celebrated by his contemporaries as the ‘Michelangelo of the North’, Schlüter was not only a sculptor, but also an architect, town planner, and designer of magnificent interiors which were created to give lustre, for the first time, to the ambitious and emerging royal capital of Berlin. To commemorate the 300th anniversary of his death, the Bode-Museum is now holding the first ever major exhibition to be devoted to this important Berlin artist.

During the reign of Elector Friedrich III (from 1701 Friedrich I, ‘King in Prussia’), Schlüter was appointed official court sculptor and was entrusted with a variety of artistic roles in the Prussian capital, during a time when Prussia was emerging as a nascent new power.

This retrospective takes in all aspects of his multifaceted work and, enriched by numerous outstanding loans, recreates the opulent world that this creator of Baroque Berlin fashioned and inhabited. The exhibition in the Bode-Museum runs from 4 April until 13 July 2014 and is spread over a total of 16 galleries and side rooms. On display are not only Schlüter’s own works, but also those of the greatest role models of his time, including sculptures by such distinguished artists as Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Francesco Mochi, Francois Girardon, and Antoine Coysevox.

More information is available at the exhibition website.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Published by Hirmer, the catalogue is available from Artbooks.com:

Hans-Ulrich Kessler, ed., Andreas Schlüter: Schöpfer des Barocken Berlin (Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 2014), 540 pages, ISBN: 978-3777421995, 50€ / $95.

39525156zAndreas Schlüter (1659/60–1714), der bedeutendste Architekt und Bildhauer der Barockzeit nördlich der Alpen, verwandelte um 1700 Berlin in eine moderne, barocke Residenzstadt. Anlässlich seines 300. Todestages erzählt das opulente Katalogbuch die spannende Geschichte von Schlüters künstlerischem Werdegang und bietet einen fundierten Überblick über sein Œuvre.

Zunächst am Hof des polnischen Königs tätig, wurde Schlüter 1694 von Kurfürst Friedrich III. von Brandenburg, ab 1701 König Friedrich I. von Preußen, nach Berlin berufen. Fortan war er als Hofkünstler maßgeblich an der Umsetzung der Repräsentationsstrategien seines königlichen Auftraggebers beteiligt, wobei er sich an so glanzvollen Kunstzentren wie Rom und Paris orientierte. In 25 Beiträgen stellen namhafte Kenner Schlüters Werk umfassend vor, beginnend mit den Jahren in Danzig und Polen über seine Berliner Blütezeit mit Hauptwerken wie dem Reiterstandbild des Großen Kurfürsten,
dem Zeughaus und dem Berliner Schloss bis hin zu seinem
Spätwerk, der Berliner Villa Kameke.

Call for Papers | Art History— Adaptation—Knowledge—Society

Posted in Calls for Papers by Editor on April 4, 2014

Art History—Adaptation—Knowledge—Society
Budapest, 20 June 2014

Proposals due by 30 April 2014

Organized by Zoltán Dragon and Miklós Székely

The end of art history was first envisioned by Hans Belting Munich’s inaugural lecture in 1983. Belting later reconsidered his theory, but the creed of art history and its consciousness have not been affected. In recent decades, the demands of society, social inclusion, forms, communications, infrastructure, and the environment have changed several times, but the discipline of art history still uses the same methodology, it interprets the actualities by applying the same structures. Meanwhile, the social utility of traditional art historical research is questioned and its usability is thrown into doubt. Other fields of the humanities adopted new structures, approaches, new interdisciplinary areas. It seems as if in the discipline of art history, change is not enforced by the profession in the strict sense, but by the commissioners and those interested. The importance of art historians is also diminished by new employment practices, when professionals of information technology, communication, and museum education are more likely to be employed in museums or in the traditional places related to heritage conservation. As a sign of the crisis, university students often neglect art historical studies and focus their interest instead on art management and curatorial studies. Belting has envisioned the future of art history in a kind of science of the image / Bildwissenschaft, but traditional art historical practices can well be represented by new emerging professionals of the reformed higher educational system. One crucial question concerns the historical focus of art history. Can art history identify itself as a historical (backward looking) field of the humanities, reflecting mainly on history, in spite of the palpable interest in contemporary interpretation of events? Creativity and the use of innovative approaches have been equally characteristic of art history, the preservation of cultural heritages, and museology. As an initiative aiming at renewal, a one-day workshop will be organized. Its purpose is to provide a forum for innovative, progressive, proactive and even provocative ideas and approaches, presenting solutions that are appropriate responses to today’s challenges through their relevant contemporary approach.

Topic Frames

1. Image and image preservation. A work of art is not always merely a matter of what is seen or how it is viewed. Works of art can be a demonstration, a performance, and documentation—if the space and time of the work have been limited, or if the work of art has been destroyed altogether. How do museums adapt in their acquisition practices to technological advancements and social changes? During the canonization-process of the works, what new contemporary meanings are added, provoked by new circumstances and surpassing the traditional framework of art history? And what happens with objects outside the museums: graffitis, tags, documents of festivals, performances, demonstrations, digital tools and mediums?

2. Monument, community, space use. Is there such a thing as a community monument, instead of or in addition to national monuments? What are the new challenges with respect to the protection of monuments caused by private “contemporary use” of public spaces? What are innovative solutions and what is the appropriate attitude to adopt towards contemporary renovations? What are the roles and limits of virtual reconstructions, their educational use, and how do they challenge traditional methods in monument conservation?

3. Museum and innovation. The post-museum is still one of the most commonly cited concepts of the museum in the theoretical discourse on museums. But what is beyond the post-museum? What are the characteristics of an innovation-based acquisition policy? What potentials are there in the stronger cooperation between the external research into the museum world and the integration of partialities into the scientific research? What are potential future solutions for real-time online publication of archival materials, and what is the next step in the participatory museum concept?

4. Changes in the history of art history methodologies are also a question of shifts of focus lies. The modern-day equivalent of taking notes on index-cards is database construction, while image albums, popularizing articles will be replaced by the photo galleries and Wikipedia. Constructing databases exempts one from interpretation and transforms the research topic into dry data, while simultaneously democratizing the data itself. The democratization of scholarship takes place on the pages of Wikipedia. But what is the future of new publications of data, essays and monographs? How will they be published, and on the basis of what, and for whom?

5. Knowledge-based society. What should be taught in public schools about the history of art and what should be taught outside the schools? Can the instruction of art history be transformed at the university level? What new educational models would be appropriate at the secondary school level or in postsecondary education? How can the transfer of knowledge be adapted to the changed social, scholarly and technological contexts?

Presentations are in ‘TED -style’. If you wish to share your vision, your ongoing research or recent scholarly findings, we encourage you to join us for the workshop! Prepare a presentation of no more than 15 minutes in length. Send us an outline by 30 April to conference@centrart.hu We will compile the program by mid-May and then reply to participants. Info on broadcasting will be provided later.

Regarding the application, there are no formal criteria: you can send short abstracts, portfolios, presentations, etc. The point is to see what questions or problems you are interested in and whether you are aware of the theoretical background, and also to give you a chance to outline your conception clearly. Be sure to write a few lines about yourself and to provide us with your contact details. The conference will be broadcast online and recorded, and the recording will be made publicly available via video-sharing. Speakers from abroad are welcome to join the event virtually and also to hold presentations via online communication mediums (Skype, Google hangout, etc). We invite you to join us as a speaker or participant for our event on the spot in Budapest or via internet on 20 June, 2014.