Enfilade

I’ve no idea how flexible the end date of 1700 is for the larger Palatium project, but I imagine this workshop will be of interest to many readers. -CH

From the Call for Papers:

Making Room for Order: Court Ordinances as a Source
for Understanding Space at Early Modern Princely Residences
Kalmar Castle, Sweden, 2–3 October 2014

Proposals due by 22 June 2014

Organized by ESF Research Networking Programme PALATIUM with Linnaeus University, Kalmar

One of the obvious sources when analysing how space was used at early modern royal residences are court ordinances. These are however far from as clear‐cut as they may seem. In several instances we can see how a world of order emerges that can easily be an illusion. Court ordinances are thus a rich material to use, but a source that poses a number of important methodological questions. The value of court ordinances has long been apparent. Already in 1761 Friedrich Carl Moser used court ordinances while compiling his work Teutsches Hof‐Recht. A more scholarly approach came later however. In 1905 and 1907 Arthur Kern published Deutsche Hofordnungen des 16. und 17. Jahrhunderts. This was an important step in making court ordinances accessible for research. After Kern various court ordinances have been published for principalities such as Kleve, Aragon, Brandenburg and Burgundy.

For court studies, the analysis of court ordinances has been indispensable. In his groundbreaking research on early modern courts, David Starkey made extensive use of the Eltham Ordinances. The possible Burgundian influences on the late Plantagenet English court, through court ordinances, is an on‐going debate. In later years two important scholarly works on early modern court ordinances have been published. The first, edited by Werner Paravicini, was Höfe und Hofordnungen 1200–1600 in 1999. This was the result of a conference in 1996 by the Residenzen‐Kommission. The second large volume, Zu Diensten Ihrer Majestät: Hofordnungen und Instruktionsbücher am frühneuzeitlichen Wiener Hof, was published in 2011 by Jakob Wührer and Martin Scheutz.

Thus, some scholars have highlighted court ordinances recently. They have however not focussed specifically on royal residences and the interplay between architecture and court life. This leaves a fruitful and rich vein for PALATIUM to tap into. The workshop in Kalmar is aimed at analysing from a methodological standpoint how we can understand the uses and ideas of space at court by deploying court ordinances as a source. It will be necessary to include not just court ordinances proper but also instructions and similar sources. The differences between court ordinances, instructions and other court laws/regulations were fluid at the time and this should be reflected in the discussions.

Naturally court ordinances have methodological issues. Why was a court ordinance drawn up? Was the aim to enforce economy at court or to enhance magnificence? The information we can draw from court ordinances depends to a large degree on such reasons. A number of evident questions to discuss leap to mind. Can we see how the shift from peripatetic to more sedentary courts is reflected in court ordinances? Will court ordinance reflect specific palaces rather than a generic group of royal residences for a prince?

Another obvious issue is how court ordinances both reflect reality and norms. Can we see if court ordinances were translated verbatim without any consideration for spatial differences between courts? Would court ordinances be switched from one architectural setting to another? Did this result in changes in architectural layout? What happened if a new court ordinance clashed with the existing palace plan? Yet another issue concerns whether we can see how different court ordinances influence each other? The example of Burgundy and the court of Edward IV have already been mentioned. Were certain court ordinances especially influential?

The interplay between the spatial reality and court ordinances must always be kept in mind. Perhaps we can deduce what a lost court ordinance looked like by using the architectural material, which can indicate both functions and shifts in those functions.

Papers will be organised around the following three topics:

I. Space and Function: Norm versus Reality
Court ordinances are interesting on two levels. First, they tell us something about prevailing ideas and attitudes within courtly society at the time. Second, they might tell us something about how reality was organised. The second half is, however, far from straightforward. As a normative source, court ordinances pose special problems. How certain can we be that ordinances paint a true picture of how space was used at court? We need case studies that analyse how far the norm was realised. What can ordinances really tell us about the use of certain spaces at certain ceremonies?

II. Invention or Tradition?
Did court ordinances actually introduce real change in how space was organised at princely courts? Can we see if court ordinances precede or follow real changes in palatial space? Perhaps a court ordinance merely reflected already existing usage rather than introducing new ways? Might court ordinances act as a conservative force?

III. A Source Leaving the Residence Partly in Shadow?
An evident methodological issue when using court ordinance is whether there are spaces at royal palaces that fall outside court ordinances? Will certain areas not be covered? Will the hunt, gardens or the menagerie be outside the usual scope? Does that mean that these areas were less constricted by ceremony and regulation? (more…)

As posted at H-ArtHist (click the link for the German version). . . 

Exhibiting Art for Sale: The Commercial Gallery Space from the 18th Century to the Present
Technische Universität Berlin, 29 November 2014

Proposals due by 10 July 2014

Those who exhibit art for sale will carefully consider the manner in which the objects are presented. Many such concepts are based on the evocation of a historic context: dealers in old master paintings, for instance, tend to show their selection in period frames and with furniture which stems from the same epoch as the exhibits. Galleries of contemporary art, on the other hand, often present their shows in so-called white cubes, futuristic spaces that avoid all periodization, thus suggesting the timeless appeal of the art they offer for sale. Other galleries again choose to dramatize their setting with unexpected, contrasting combinations of objects originating from different periods and a variety of regions.

The commercial gallery thus provides a space where the significance of art is set in complex relation to its market value. This rarely considered subject will be explored by the 3rd Workshop of the Forum Art and Market, TU Berlin. By investigating the strategies of cooperating and competing agents, this conference not only aims to reveal modes of presentation typical for specific periods; it also seeks to address the changing concepts of selling exhibitions as a reflection of the art market’s history from the 18th century to the present day.

Proposals for contributions may for instance address the following aspects:
• the presentations of objects and the design of selling exhibitions (frames and bases, lighting, furniture, wall colours and covering, arrangement of exhibits, the size of spaces and their succession, show cases, shop windows, etc.) in art galleries, auction houses, academies, art fairs, museums and exhibition spaces managed by art associations
• the (changing) purposes of exhibitions in the art trade (such as providing information, education and pleasure, adding value, enabling pricing and sales) and the visitors they address
• the marketing and reception of such presentations in word and image (catalogues, advertisements, published reviews, artists’ notes, correspondence, etc.), also in comparison with non-commercial art exhibitions

Conference languages are German and English. Please send proposals (maximum 2000 characters), and a brief curriculum by 10 July 2014 to: exhibitingartforsale@gmail.com. Additional information on the conference cycle of the Forum Art and Market and its annual workshops may be found here.

Convenors: Dorothee Wimmer, Johannes Nathan, and Bénédicte Savoy, assisted by Lukas Fuchsgruber

While the main deadline for submitting paper proposals for consideration for CAA 2015 passed earlier this month, here’s a late due date for a 90-minute session sponsored by the Historians of British Art:

CAA 2015 Session | Home Subjects: Domestic Space and the Arts in Britain, 1753–1900
College Art Association Conference, New York, 11–14 February 2015

Proposals due by 15 August 2014

Session chairs:
Dr. Melinda McCurdy (Associate Curator of British Art, Huntington Art Collections), mmccurdy@huntington.org
Dr. Morna O’Neill (Wake Forest University), morna.oneill@gmail.com
Dr. Anne Nellis Richter (independent scholar and adjunct instructor, American University), anne.nellis@gmail.com

Home Subjects is a new research working group which aims to illuminate the domestic display of art in Britain. Our goal is to examine the home as a place to view and exhibit works of art within the historical context of the long nineteenth century. Recent scholarship has emphasized the importance of the house itself and notions of ‘domesticity’ as important touchstones in British culture. At the same time, art historians have tended to focus on a history of British art premised on the display of art in public; according to this important narrative, British art developed in relationship to the public sphere in the eighteenth century. Art institutions and exhibitions asserted the importance of the display of art in forming audiences into publics in cultural and political terms. Such efforts continued in the ‘exhibition age’ of the nineteenth century, when display of artwork in museums, galleries, and special exhibitions solidified the important role given to art in articulating a public sphere. This narrative overlooks the continuation of older paradigms of display, especially those premised on the private and domestic audience for works of art. Within this context, the country house takes it place alongside the townhouse as an important venue for the display of art. We aim to explore this ‘counter-narrative’ of the home as the ideal place to view works of art, a view which permeated all areas of art and design and which persisted throughout the nineteenth century, despite the prevailing narrative of the development of public museums.

Also at stake in this project is a reconsideration of domesticity and its relationship to modernity. Important recent scholarship has illuminated some of the ways in which entrenched narratives of modernity and artistic modernism were defined in opposition to the domestic sphere. In a typical avant-garde gambit, artists distinguished works of art from objects of interior decoration by rejecting the private and the domestic. This session aims to bring together scholars whose work addresses this topic in order to posit a new trajectory for modernity, one that can be traced through the private, domestic sphere.

Topics of interest include but are not limited to:
• the display of easel painting and its relationship to the domestic interior
• decorative arts, their status as works of art and relationship to interior decoration
• domestic architecture and museum/gallery architecture, both public and private
• collecting and taste
• the interrelationship between private and public modes of display and decoration

Proposal abstracts should be no more than 500 words, and should be accompanied by a current 2-page c.v. and must be received by email to homesubjects@gmail.com by August 15, 2014. Please also include a mailing address, telephone number, and email.

As posted at H-ArtHist:

The Material Culture of Magic
Book Project Edited by Antje Bosselmann-Ruickbie and Leo Ruickbie

Proposals due by 1 August 2014

Magic is a wide field of research comprising what we might call the occult, paranormal events, anomalous experience, spirituality and other phenomena throughout human history. However, research has often been focused more narrowly on the historical analysis of written sources, or the anthropology and occasionally sociology of practitioners and their communities, for example. What is often overlooked are the physical artefacts of magic themselves.

In all areas of research, ‘material culture’ is becoming increasingly important—the ‘material turn’ as it has been labelled. This is particularly the case for disciplines that traditionally have not focused on object studies but on theory such as historical or social sciences. However, it is self-evident that the objects emerging from a culture provide valuable information on societies and their history. This is also and particularly the case for magic and related phenomena. Magic, especially, became divorced from its concrete expressions as academic study focused on problems of rationality and functionalist explanation. (more…)

As posted at H-ArtHist:

The Ends of American Art
Stanford University, 7–8 November 2014

Proposals due by 9 June 2014

The Art & Art History Department at Stanford University invites submissions from advanced graduate students for a unique opportunity to share your work in a collaborative setting with leading scholars of American art and visual culture. The Ends of American Art International Conference is designed to explore new possibilities for
thinking about, performing, producing, and writing the history of American art.  It will meditate on the ‘ends of American Art’ by questioning whether certain longstanding tropes within the field may now be outmoded (e.g. nationalism, American art as a history of painting and sculpture). Looking forward, we will also ponder what the new goals (or ‘ends’) of the field should be in the 21st century.

The two-day event will feature papers by senior scholars as well as two ‘workshop’ panels in which selected graduate students will present a 5-minute presentation of their project using only 1 slide. These workshops are designed to both gain a sense of the current landscape of the field and to offer participating students feedback from a diverse interdisciplinary audience in a workshop context.

Conference Features for Selected Participants
• Round-trip airfare to SFO International Airport, lodging while in Palo Alto, and ground transportation during the conference
• Opportunity to workshop your project in a collaborative setting with leading scholars from multiple fields
• Opportunity to witness the current shape of scholarship in American Art and Visual Culture as animated in the work of other advanced graduate students in the U.S. and abroad
• Be among the first scholars to view the Anderson Collection of American Art soon to be installed in a new building next to Stanford’s Cantor Arts Center
•Participate in the live webcast of the conference, which will feature real-time forums online in addition to the discussions taking place at Stanford

Eligibility
• Dissertation project must address issues in American art and visual culture, broadly defined in terms of historical period and interpretive approach (projects from all disciplines are welcome and encouraged)
• Students must be in the writing stage of the dissertation (ABD status or equivalent)

Requirement for Submission
1. CV (including university affiliation, contact information for Dissertation Committee Chair, and expected date of completion)
2. 250-word abstract of your project
3. 1 image that will be the subject of your 5-minute presentation

Please send all documents to ebennet@stanford.edu by 9 June 2014.

Now accepting proposals for this panel for next year’s ISECS Congress in Rotterdam:

The International Thread: Lace and Commerce in Eighteenth-Century Europe
ISECS Congress, Rotterdam, 26–31 July 2015

Proposals due by 15 June 2014

Chairs: Tara Zanardi, (Department of Art & Art History Hunter College/CUNY 695 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10065; tzanardi@hunter.cuny.edu), and Michael Yonan, (Department of Art History and Archaeology, University of Missouri, 21 Parker Hall, Columbia, MO, 65211; yonanm@missouri.edu)

Enormous amounts of lace flooded the marketplaces of eighteenth-century Europe, which fostered a vibrant international trade. This marketplace centered on competition between the Low Countries (especially the regions that now comprise Belgium) and northern France, two areas that included Europe’s most technically accomplished lacemaking centers, including Alençon, Argentan, Brussels, Mechlin, and Valenciennes. These towns exported huge quantities of lace to an international clientele and competed with locally manufactured lace. Our panel seeks papers that examine how lace operated within eighteenth-century mercantile networks, economic systems, and black markets. What were the trade factors that affected the distribution of lace, both locally and globally, and how did those factors affect working conditions, design choices, and the objects created? How did these market conditions affect what lace was used for, be it garments, decorative items, or household textiles? Topics might include treatments of lace and lace making in gendered terms, as statements of regional or national pride, labor practices in lacemaking, techniques and materials, and the industry’s global ambitions. Interdisciplinary papers are especially welcome.

As noted at The History of Women Religious of Britain and Ireland (among other places) . . .

Intersections: Yearbook for Early Modern Studies 2017
The Global Republic of Sacred Things: The Circulation of Religious Art in the Early Modern World

Proposals due by 30 June 2014

Sixteenth-century Europe was a time when monarchial territories were redrawn, permanent schisms split a single church, and sustained, repeated circumnavigation of the globe was achieved for the first time. The ‘globalization’ of the early modern world expanded and transformed the ‘Republic of Things’. While there has been an increasing literature on biographies and itineraries of objects, European religious overseas networks, often at the heart of Protestant Reformation and post-Tridentine political, geographical and theological reform, have received considerably less attention to date. How, for example, did points of contact by agent, merchant and missionary impact the early modern imagination as a social practice? And how did the journeys of images, artifacts, and precious cargoes across intersecting networks affect their value and use? Previously, these webs of communication
bore only incidental information about the material cultures their presence at the frontiers of known lands stimulated at home and abroad. Further still, as European systems largely governed by and for Europeans, the things that linked religious and commercial networks have the potential to offer insight into Europe’s initial attempts to grapple with long-distance contact zones. In a challenge to models of individual organizations, cultural comparisons, and post-colonial theories of industrialized societies, this volume seeks to consider how a sacred Republic of Things—material residues of global encounter most broadly conceived (masterpieces, decorative art and functional objects)—can cast light on the dramatis personae of the fifteenth- to eighteenth-centuries as they came to terms with an expanding world.

Objects should give some evidence of the interaction of Europe with Asia, Africa or the Americas, and religious ‘things’, or objects of devotion, that have not yet had their moment in the sun are ideal. We are particularly interested in the production of artisanal cultures, local accommodation via technologies and materials, shifting currencies of value and objects used against the grain of their intended purpose. Issues at stake could include, but need not be limited to, the globalization of different types of religious subjects or objects, the use of new media (either alone or in conjunction with others), mimesis and memory, spolia and translation, commoditization and mobility.

Working Schedule
Proposals are due June 30, 2014.
Applicants will be notified no later than July 31, 2014.
First drafts of papers (approximately 8,000 words, including endnotes) will be expected by December 15, 2015.
An intensive workshop (pending funding) will take place the week of January 18, 2016.
Final papers should be sent to the editors by July 1, 2016.
Publication is scheduled for 2017.

Please send proposals (PDF format preferred) before June 30, 2014 to both editors (Prof. Dr. Christine Göttler, Prof. Dr. Mia M. Mochizuki)
with:
1. A one-page abstract (300 words) with at least one exemplary image
2. A curriculum vitae (maximum two pages)
christine.goettler@ikg.unibe.ch
mia.mochizuki@nyu.edu

Tableau Vivant: La Politique de l’Interruption
Paris, 31 October 2014

Proposals due by 15 June 2014

Journée d’études organisée par Michel Poivert et Julie Ramos

Désormais étudié dans ses différentes modalités historiques et esthétiques, le tableau vivant ne cesse de nous interroger sur la puissance d’un arrêt (du geste comme de l’image) : quelle est la nature de la force expressive de l’immobilité ? Considérer parfois comme anachronique au regard des arts du mouvement, le tableau vivant dans ce qu’il peut avoir d’archaïque propose une intensité que le théâtre ou l’arrêt sur image au cinéma ont largement expérimentée. L’artifice de l’immobilité contrainte des tableaux vivants peut-elle se comprendre à l’aune d’une réflexion sur les rapports entre l’image et le politique ? En performant le tableau vivant, la scène et le corps s’inscrivent dans une relation à l’espace social qui n’est pas dénué d’enjeux idéologiques. Objet singulier de l’histoire de l’art, le tableau vivant ouvre en réalité des perspectives plus larges qui concernent toutes les pratiques artistiques, le théâtre et la danse, la vidéo et la performance, ou bien encore l’installation. En proposant de repérer les enjeux politiques de l’immobilité à travers le paradigme du tableau vivant, il sera question d’autorité et de liberté, de l’économie générale du rapport entre le spectateur, l’auteur et l’acteur, et peut être aussi de penser la question de la création en dehors de l’image.

Date limite de réception des propositions de communication : 15 juin 2014.Les propositions doivent être adressées à Michel Poivert (m.poivert@orange.fr) et Julie Ramos (julie.ramos@free.fr). Les propositions de communication ne devront pas dépasser 300 mots et comporter : nom et prénom de(s) auteur(s), court C.V. et bibliographie sélective, titre(s), fonction(s) et institution de rattachement, coordonnées (adresse postale et électronique, téléphone), titre de la communication et principaux arguments.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Le « tableau vivant » questionne les définitions traditionnelles de l’art. Communément défini comme un arrangement de personnes vivantes reproduisant de manière immobile une composition artistique, que ce soit une peinture, une sculpture ou une estampe, le tableau vivant aurait, selon un récit largement admis, connu son apogée au XIXe siècle (notamment par sa désignation en 1839 dans le récit La Toison d’or de Gautier.) C’est toutefois à cette période qu’il commence à être dévalorisé pour ses rapports avec le divertissement populaire, la photographie, voire l’érotisme. Cette croyance en un déclin du tableau vivant a contribué à concentrer son étude autour de 1800 (voir l’étude pionnière de Kirsten G. Holmström), à occulter ses origines plus anciennes, ainsi qu’à négliger ses évolutions ultérieures et son apport à l’histoire de l’art. L’objectif de la journée d’étude est de pallier ces manques en rassemblant des spécialistes du Moyen Âge, de l’époque moderne (XVIIe–XVIIIe siècles) et de la période contemporaine, afin d’en saisir les enjeux dans la longue durée.

Les études sur le tableau vivant ont jusqu’à présent majoritairement été menées par des historiens du spectacle. Ils l’ont en effet rattachés aux réformes scéniques du XVIIIe siècle, qu’il s’agisse de la redécouverte de la pantomime antique chez les théoriciens de la danse (Cahusac, Noverre, etc.) ou de la théorie du « quatrième mur » de Diderot, qui valorise l’immobilisation de l’action théâtrale en un « tableau dramatique ». À ces éléments s’ajoute l’ascendant, analysé par les historiens de l’art, des théories néo-classiques (Winckelmann, Lessing, etc.), qui préconisent pour les arts visuels la représentation du « moment fécond » d’une action, rendu sensible dans un geste suspendu exprimant la vie intérieure des figures. La plupart des spécialistes identifient ainsi le premier tableau vivant moderne dans la reproduction de L’Accordée de village de Jean-Baptiste Greuze au milieu de l’acte II des Noces d’Arlequin donné par Carlin à la Comédie Italienne, en 1761, l’année même de l’exposition de la toile au Salon.

Le tableau vivant s’émancipe ensuite rapidement de la scène pour se propager comme genre autonome dans les salons privés de l’élite cultivée européenne. S’y associe la pratique dite des « attitudes », inaugurée par Emma Hart, épouse de Sir William Hamilton, qui adoptait des « poses plastiques » inspirées des statues antiques et des silhouettes des vases étrusques de la collection de son époux. Enfin, Goethe contribue à la vogue des tableaux vivants au XIXe siècle, en les insérant dans la trame de son roman Les Affinités électives (1809). Il avait non seulement assisté au « attitudes » de Lady Hamilton lors de son voyage à Naples en 1787 et avait inclus le tableau vivant à ses réflexions sur le théâtre (voir l’essai sur son monodrame Proserpine) mais il en avait aussi été l’ordonnateur à la cour de Weimar.

Le tableau vivant et ses genres connexes (les attitudes et « poses plastiques ») questionnent les frontières à la fois esthétiques et sociales : entre œuvre originale et reproduction, imitation d’une image et présence des protagonistes, auteur et spectateur, mise en scène de soi et voyeurisme. Il contribue notamment à briser le contrôle à l’accès culturel, par son lien aux pratiques amateures et par ses déplacements d’un monde « aristocratique » et « artiste » aux scènes populaires, aux ateliers de photographie et aux premières projections filmiques. Au-delà de l’histoire du tableau vivant durant les XVIIIe et XIXe siècles, qui contribue à l’arrimer à la question du « faire tableau » dans l’ensemble des arts, l’étude de ses précédents dans les Mystères médiévaux et les fêtes d’Ancien Régime ouvre d’autres perspectives. Si les chercheurs n’ont repéré, pour ces périodes anciennes, qu’une seule occurrence d’une performance réalisée d’après une œuvre d’art (la reproduction du fameux polyptyque de l’Agneau Mystique des frères Van Eyck lors de l’entrée de Philippe le Bon à Gand en 1458), nombreuses sont les performances de personnes s’immobilisant pour « faire image » à l’occasion des rituels religieux et princiers. Leur disparition progressive au profit des « machines » et des décors imposés par la monarchie absolue pose la question du pouvoir qui s’y déploie. Pouvoir de figer l’infigurabilité du vivant ? Ou revanche du vivant sur l’image lors de performances dont l’hybridité fondamentale (entre l’art et de la vie) permet d’en briser l’efficacité ? Ces questions semblent réactualisées par les pratiques plus contemporaines du tableau vivant, du cinéma à l’art contemporain, en passant par le très populaire festival Pageant of the Masters, organisé à Laguna Beach depuis 1933. Elles permettent d’envisager les relations entre image et performativité, leurs affinités et leurs tensions dans l’instant suspendu. Elles supposent d’interroger le rôle de l’auteur de ces images collectives, mais aussi leur dimension politique.

Images IV: Images of the Other: Istanbul—Vienna—Venice
Austrian Cultural Forum, Istanbul, 2–4 September 2014

Proposals due by 20 June 2014

After the conferences Images I: Films as Spaces of Cultural Encounters (2011), Images II: Images of the Poor (2012), and Images III: Images of the City (2013), the Images Project is planning to focus on ‘Images of the Other’ as documented in images and representations of Istanbul, Vienna, and Venice in its 2014 conference.

Since the Middle Ages all three cities have been (culturally) mythologized as points of cultural intersection in works of literature, arts and film—be it as the spaces where East meets West, where lines blur between the conscious and the subconscious, between life and death, between the visible/ the seen and the invisible/ the unseen, or as spaces identified with the evil, as the Moloch luring—all these mythologizations being part both of the self-perception documented in the native cultural production and of the perception from the (cultural) ‘outside’. Regarding this fact the Images project has decided to discuss the (historically) changing representation and perception of the three cities in its 2014 conference Images IV: Images of the Other: Istanbul—Vienna—Venice, with the representations being seen as documentations of cultural approaches and also of cultural concepts. Hence, the historically grown mythologizations of the three cities create a sheer unlimited number of potential cases of both cultural encounters and conflicts, including most of the socially relevant fields in the academic discourse on the topic, like politics, communication, culture, and migration.

In order to discuss issues like the above mentioned Images IV: Images of the Other: Istanbul—Vienna—Venice invites scholars, architects, photographers, writers, artists, and filmmakers to propose papers in the following fields of research and interest:

• The Making of a Myth (theoretical approaches with special reference to Istanbul, Vienna, and Venice)
• The psychology of feeling Istanbulite, Viennese and Venetian
• The psychology of attraction (theoretical approaches with special reference to Istanbul, Vienna, and Venice)
• Istanbul’s, Vienna’s, Venice’s cityscape as a (mythologized) statement
• The impact of the media (news, internet, daily soaps) on the perception of Istanbul, Vienna, and Venice
• Images of Istanbul, Vienna, and Venice in feature films (present and past)
• Images of Istanbul, Vienna, and Venice in the Arts (present and past)
• Images of Istanbul, Vienna, and Venice as seen by photographers (present and past)
• Images of Istanbul, Vienna, and Venice in literature (present and past)

The conference Images IV: Images of the Other: Istanbul—Vienna—Venice is planned as an interdisciplinary international conference. It will bring together senior scholars with PhD students, postdoctoral academics, and members of the artistic community without following the classical keynote speaker pattern but rather inviting all speakers either to present their research findings in 20-minute (paper) presentations plus 10 minutes for discussion or in 120–150 minute panels (4–5 panelists). There will be no parallel sessions. All sessions will be plenary sessions. The conference language is English. Selected articles of each session/ field of research will be published as a volume of conference proceedings. Münster, Berlin, Vienna and New York based LIT Verlag has already declared strong interest in publishing the conference proceedings. The publication will provide limited space for black-and-white illustrations. Please, send paper proposals to images-1@gmx.at and cc them to veronika.bernard@uibk.ac.at and otuzun@hotmail.com and gonul.ucele@bahcesehir.edu.tr

Deadline for paper submission for publication in conference proceedings: 1 month after conference
Planned date of publication of conference proceedings: July 2015

Images Project Director
Veronika Bernard (University of Innsbruck)

Conference Organizing Committee
Veronika Bernard (University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck)
Hatice Övgü Tüzün (Bahçeşehir University, Istanbul)
Gönül Ücele (Bahçeşehir University, Istanbul)

Thanks again to Christina Smylitopoulos, HECAA is scheduled to be represented at this year’s UAAC Conference! Details and a full list of panels are available here»

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Universities Art Association of Canada / l’association d’art des universités du Canada
OCAD University, Toronto, 20–26 October 2014

Proposals due by 18 June 2014

HECAA Open Session (Historians of Eighteenth-Century Art and Architecture)
The objective of this society is to stimulate, foster, and disseminate knowledge of all aspects of visual culture in the long eighteenth century. This HECAA open session welcomes papers that examine any aspect of art and visual culture from the 1680s to the 1830s. Special consideration will be given to proposals that demonstrate innovation in theoretical and/or methodological approaches. Please email proposals for 20-minute papers to Dr. Christina Smylitopoulos (University of Guelph), csmylito@uoguelph.ca.