7/27/2019 The Making of History of Art 15

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-making-of-history-of-art-15 1/5

The Making of History of Art 15

Svetlana Alpers

 Art Journal, Vol. 54, No. 3, Rethinking the Introductory Art History Survey. (Autumn, 1995), pp.62-65.

Stable URL:

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0004-3249%28199523%2954%3A3%3C62%3ATMOHOA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-U

 Art Journal is currently published by College Art Association.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtainedprior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content inthe JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/journals/caa.html.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to and preserving a digital archive of scholarly journals. Formore information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

http://www.jstor.orgTue May 29 13:15:48 2007

7/27/2019 The Making of History of Art 15

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-making-of-history-of-art-15 2/5

John Berger. Ways of S e e ~ n g .London: BBC and Penguin

Books, 1972.

Madeline H. Caviness. "Patron or Matron? A4C apet ian B r ide

and a Vade Mecum for Her Marr iage Bed." Speculum

68 (19931:3 3 3 - 6 2 .

Part 6: Michael Baxandall's Patterns of Intention

( fou r c las s d i scuss ions )

The f inal weeks of the course were devoted to a carefu l

discussion of this difficult hook. Attention was given to the

relat ionship between Baxandall' s ca se s tudies and those that

had be en re ad previously . In the f inal m eeting I share d one of

my own in te rp re t i ve p roject s -a s tud y of the Lou is de

R o n c h e r o l l e s w i n d o w 1 1 5 . 2 2 1 f r o m t h e C a t h e d r a l o f

Beauvais-which ha d be en influen ced by Baxandall 's Pat-

terns of lntentwn and Linda Seidel ' s s tory tel l ing .

,, Readzng

Michael Baxandall . Patterns of Intentwn: O n the Hzstorual

Explanatwn of Putures . N ~ M aken: f i l e U n ~ v e r s i t~

Press , 1985.

Linda Se ide l . '" Jdn \a n E ~ c k ' s r no l f in~ o r tr ai t' : B us iness as

Usual!" C r ~ t ~ a ln q u z r ~16 ( 4 u t u m n 19891: 54-86 .

votes

Ttris ehsa! narra tes a proces* of curr icu lar deconstruct ion. explorat ion. an d recon-

s truct lon that I *hared he tween *pr ing 198 7 and fa l l 19 88 w ith commi t t ed and

~ n s p i r ~ n g H u n g e r f o r d . T. Kauri Kitao. andol l eagues a t S wart l imore : Cons t ance C a ~ n

esperlal l ! Diane O'Donoghue. ntro*e ded~c at lo n o interpretr\e ~ntegri t ! and ped-

agogica l c rea t i \ it! He re ~ns t rume nta l n rea l i i ~n g cur r i cu l a r \ Islon that cou ld rrreet

t lie chal lenges of t tre "new" art t r ~s to r\ n a I~ he ral r ts col lege. T hr cou rse ahout

wh~c t r * r i t ewas nur tured and re f ined through t l ie s uhs rquent t eachrngo f thes e *ame

col l eagues . j o ~n ed \ en tua l l ) h! Da n~ e l rna r tt and Il l a rihr th C; rayh~ll .a t id throu gh

the cornrn it t ed d ~a l ogu e f se \er al generatLon* of Swarthrrrore *tud ents. 1 also want to

acknowledge w i th gra t~ tudem ) enduring ind eht rdn ess to Professor Ctrri>trne ihlc-

Corke l1 Has enmue l le r Col le \ . ~ t r on s pr ing of 1973. a t \ and e rh ~ l tUnl\ersi t! . f~ rs t

introduced rrre to a , is ion of thrs disciplrne as an en gross ing and s ingularl! rneaning-

fill proce*s in M hich art a nd i t* his to p could cont~n ual l! he new. Ttris report is for her.

1. T his \\a*. 1 niust confe**. a n ea* ) positlon for rrre to take when I hega n to argue for

curricu lar reform at tt re hegin ning of a term as department chair . . * medie\alrs t

special izing In the s tud ) of French (;ott r ic s tained glass . the art and art rs ts that

interes ted me had alna! 5 re s ided out s ide or on the f r~ ng es f the canon. and canon lral

modes rd interpretation had not alx a\ s heen ver! usefu l in stud!ing either. Ille!er

S ch ap~ ro ad . a f t e r al l . p ro \ ided a model of differentiated. nonlrnear. "postmodern"

a r t h~s to r l ca l i s cours e for rnrd ieva l is t* s ince t l ie 1 930s .

2. "Educat ional Program: Pro gram for Freshmen and Sophomores ." Sl~,ar t /~r no re

G ) l k a r B i ~ l k t i r i 2 . n o. 1 iS eptemher 19941: 60 .

3. A prlmar? fear was that *inr e the nex cour*e would he rnore *erious . it would h r

less fun. and enrollments ~ o u l d rop . And IS fewer s tudent s took rn t roduc tor , a r this ton durln g their f irs t two )ears . not onI! would enrol lments in upper-level cour*eb

dei line . hu t fewer students would e1ec.t the art hi*tol-\ major. T hi s doniino effert rnight

threaten the future of the Department of 4r t wit h~ ntre rollege. nP H ere ~ a r n e d o ur

col leagues that if a department l ike ours-wtr~ch unlrhe English L~te ratu reor

Histor!. for example. cannot assu me a n audie nce of s tudent* read) on arrival to enrol l

i n r ts < , ou r se * - ba s ed l t* ~ n t r o d u c t o ~ r a th e rur r i ru lurn on e d u c a t r o n a l p r ~ n c ~ p l e s

t h an o n a t t r a c t ~ n gtudents . ~twould ul t imate~! fa11 i r t im to enrol lment *tat l*tlc*. 4 b

a resul t of suctr anxiet ,. sorne s rnal l department* at S~ art l i r no re hose not to rethink

t he ir ~ ~ u r r i c u l u mn relation to the PI)(; initidti,? hut to arg ue instead that the) were

a l r r a d \ t c a c h ~ n e n t n - l r \ e l c o u r w s t h a t u u a l i fi r d a s P I ) C s . I n o u r c a * e t tr e sr f e a rsc. .

*re rn t o ha \ e heen unwar ran t ed . The nrwl! c rea t ed a r t l> is ton in tmdu c ton cours e

becanre s o popula r an iong s tudrn t i s eck inp to fu lf i l i t he humanr t i e* P I)C r equ~ reme nt

,earl1 rrrust take two to eradua tej and arnong huma nit ie> major* ierkin " to broaden t l ie

s c op e r d th e i r i n te r p r e tr \ e ~ n q u i r , h a t d u e t o o \ e r ~ u b s c r l l ~ t l o ne were rdten forced to

lotter) m ost of the s ~ xo e~ gt rt ect lon* (each l lrrrl ted to 2 2 to 2 5 s tudents1 taught

annu al l? . This ba s especial l! surpris ing in relat ion to our lnl t~ al xpectat ton that M C

~ o u l d eed to of fe r on l j four sec t lons dur lng a s ~ ng le cadernlc !ear.

4. Th e fi r*t canon of core works co nt a~ ne d l ie .4rctr .of Constant ine (312-151. t tre

S a~nte -Lha pe l l e 1243-481, I l l~c l i e l ange lds l az id 115011. Leona rdo da \~nc i ' * Las t

Sup prr (149.5-981, Edo uard I llan eis Ol1mp1a 118631, Pablo Pirasso's Demorselles

d.Yciprwn 119071. the Taj hIaha1 (1632-54 1. and R an g >leng'* Duwlling in Retreat in

the Blue Pien .$fountains 113661. Th e text> He ag reed to include were: Kitzinger. "On

ttre Interpretat ion of St!l is t ic Change"; Sctrapiro. " F~ um loiarah ic to Kornane*que in

Silo*": Se!mour. cha pte r 1 of .Mlch elanp ~lr;sD a \ ~ d :Wnof> kj . "lconograph) and

Iconolog!": Llpto n, "hlan et: A R ad ic al ~z ed eniale Image?": Begle!. "The hl!th of

the Taj I l lahaf ' : and 1- nog grad. ' .F ami l) P mper t~eb . " S ee cou rs e de s c r~pt lo n or

complete reference*.

S V E T L A N A ALPERS

his report on a revised introductory- course at Ber-

keley is being writ ten af te r the cou rse was of fered forthe f ir s t t ime. I t is s t i l l , i n o ther words. provis ional.

But s in ce to be provisional is par t of our in tention , perhaps

th is is as good a moment as any to go public . This repor t ,

then . is not in tende d as announ cing a program and cer tain ly

not as pro posing a m odel for others to follow. For while som e of

the p rob lems we have add ressed migh t be w idesp read . the

solu tion is ad hoc and s i te sp ecif ic . And it is provis ional.

Fo r some t ime there have been th r ee in t roduc to ry

courses at Berkeley: the be ginn ing of ar t (var iously def ine d)

to Giotto . and Giotto to Picas so eac h had a semester , with a

separa te seme ster g iven to the ar ts of Asia. Th e f ir s t and the

las t have continued: i t is the middl e term that h as g iven way.

The ne ed for cha nge was overdetermined. Pres sures of

fund ing and in te l lec tua l p r es su res accum ula ted and together

contr ibu ted to th e result . With two professors ( for some years

Carol Armstrong and me ) d iv id in g the lecture s of a long

Berkeley term ( f if teen weeks. or close to th ir ty eighty-minute

lectures) . and f ive to s ix graduate-s tudent ins tructors teach-

ing sec t ions , the o ld G io t to to P icasso cou r se had been

expensive to staf f. Th e univers i ty judged i t an unecono mical

use of professor ial t ime, while members of the depar tment

wanted to f ree graduat e ins tructors for o ther courses . Mean-

the his tory of ar t def ined as Giotto

ingly seemed less central to the d iscip linary enterpr ise. A

sign had bee n the wild growth of H. P;.: Janson's History of Art

as new venues and new groups jos t led for sp ac e in a ver i tab le

world history of art. Could the much-disputed core text

continue to survive s imply beca use i t supplie d names, dates .

and convenient take-home pictures for our

Various proposals were enter tained-a thematic ap-

preach. perhaps? But it appealed to many oft he faculty to try

to pu t som eth ing toge ther as a group. without a chrorlological

organization. without a precise notion of coverage, and with

7/27/2019 The Making of History of Art 15

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-making-of-history-of-art-15 3/5

the addition of lectu res by a num ber of willing and intereste d

outsiders-a historian perh aps, but also an anthropological

archaeologist, a psychologist of perception, a prac ticing art-

ist, a museum curator, a philosopher. What would hold the

cours e together would b e a g roup of nine to ten core works of

art , European and American, but also Asian, which re-

mained to be chosen. Each work was to be presented in a

lecture, but all would be taken up from different points of

view by the members of the departmental staff in the two to

three lectures each was expected to give. A dossier-a

photograph and a catalogue entry or its equivalent of each

work-was to be assem bled for eac h studen t, with some

works, when possible, es tablishe d instea d by the purchase of

an affordable book with good plates. These, together with

museum visits, would take the place of Janson photographs.

It was decided to forego a textbook. A photocopied re ade r was

to be put together with essays/articles of relevance to the

works or of some general interest. Th e lecturers from ou tside

the field were invited to make a cam eo appe aranc e taking up

anything they wished from their own work that had some

bearing on thinking about or looking at works of art. Thepur pos e was to produce alterna tive ways of looking.

Th e schem e has the vir tue of flexibility. It draws on the

resident art history staff in any year and does not depend on

the presence of a par ticular faculty member. It is also eco-

nomical. Only one professor (a job I ag ree d to do for the first

year) is necessary to schedule and coordinate the approx-

imately eight internal and six external lecturers who offer

their services without compensation. In order to trim down

the number of graduate-student instructors employed, we

decided to ask two to three students to spend their t ime

reading and commenting on six short papers rather than

using the normal five to six to prepare and to teach weekly

discussion meetings with time to correct fewer papers.

So, it was largely through consideration of a feasible

teaching structure that this introductory course was trans-

formed from a chronological survey, with an emphasis on

learning nam es and dates a s well as on pictorial a nalysis, to a

practical course in looking, reading, l istening, and most

centrally, writing about works of art. By way of confirming

this emphasis, but also fitting the exigencies of staffing, the

necessary permission was obtained from the faculty-wide

committee to waive the normal midterm an d final exams. T he

hybrid nature of the history of art, a historical study thatenga ges skills of visual attention and cr itica l judgment, was

built in without being argued.

When t he faculty met to implement this rough plan, the

talk turned first to the list of core works. Each faculty

mem ber needed one work, also of interes t to the others, that

he or she would present in a single lecture. T here was much

give-and-take, and a s it turned out, we did not each ne ces-

sarily nominate our own particu lar work. A historical range

and variety of media seemed desirable. The coverage was

basically Re naissan ce to the present. The dossier and il lus-

trated books were also in the back of our minds. Th e discus-

sion was heated though it was not quite clear what was at

stake. Memos went back and forth in the da ys that followed. It

was an interplay a bout works of art tha t this faculty normally

had no occasion to have. H ere is the fina l l ist in the order in

which they were actually presented by particular lecturers

(the experiment, i t must be emphasized, depends on local

conditions):

Vermeer

Seurat

Rodin

Piero della Francesca

Chardin

Daumier

Maya Lin

Ingres

Constable

Art of Pain ting (Alpers)

La Grande Jatte (Alpers)

Gates $Hell (Jacques de Caso,

Anne Wagner)

Resurrection (Michael Baxandall)

Return from Market (Baxandall,

Margaretta Lovell)

Rue Transrwnain (f ig . 1 5 )

(Wagner)

Vietn am Veterans Memorial

(f ig .16) (Lovell, W agner)63

Portrait drawing (Lovell)

Wivenhoe Park (T. J. Clark)

An Indian painting and temple (Joanna Williams) and a

Chinese figure an d a land scap e painting (James Cahill) were

presented outside of the list but in the future would be

included. Since ancient and medieval art continued to be

taught in the previous survey format, those faculty members

did not take pa rt here. For the possible implications of this for

the introductory program a s a whole, s ee below.

When I first typed out the list, it put me in mind of a

radio program broa dcas t on Saturday mornings that I fancied

as a child. Listen ers were invited to send in the nam es of four

disp ara te items to a storyteller who was challenged to make a

good tale out of them all. He always seemed to succe ed. But

we had nine items and multiple storytellers.

At a second m eeting we chose readings, to which each

of the visiting lecturers added something they had written.

Th e art history readin gs (roughly related to the core works)

were a s follows: Piero (Vasari's life); Chardin (Diderot from

F I G . 5 Honore Daumier, Rue Transnonain, 75 April 7834,1834. lithograph.12x 17% inches. Private collection.

ART JOURNAL

7/27/2019 The Making of History of Art 15

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-making-of-history-of-art-15 4/5

F I G . 16 Maya Lin. Vietnam Veterans Memorial, 1982. black granite. 500 feetlong. Washington. D.C.

the Salon of 1763, and some eighteenth-century French criti-

cism); Daumier (from Baudelaire, Some French Caricatur-

ists); Rodin (Rainer Maria Rilke, Dante, The Infirm, canto

33); Seurat (Meyer Schapiro, "Seurat and the Grand Jatte"

and "Seurat"; Constable (Gombrich, from Art and Illusion);

Clement Greenberg, "C6zanne and the Unity of Modern Art";

selections from Ea rly Chinese Texts on Painting, ed. SusanBush; Clifford Geertz, "Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese

Cockfight."

We tried to list what approaches or questions we would

each concentrate on. Looking back at our notes, it is clear

that such prior declarations were not always carried out. But

the attempt to formulate them had its effect. The course was

unadventurously titled 'Approaches to Art History." The stu-

dents reported that they did get a sense of what these might

be.

And so to the course as given. The students heard two

to three lectures each from eight art historians interspersed

with lectures by six visitors. The visitors the first year were

Margaret Conkey (archaeology/anthropology), Robert Bren-

tan0 (history), James Steward (museum curator), Wayne

Thiebaud (painter), Irvin Rock (perceptual psychology), and

Richard Wollheim (philosophy). The lecturers were encour-

aged to talk for no more than an hour, leaving twenty minutes

for questions and discussion. I attended every lecture as

course coordinator and also, as it happened, as course ani-

mator, since it was not always easy for the class to respond on

the spot to a lecturer. Some professors came to hear, and to

comment on, each other. Graduate students and others from

the community dropped in to this or that lecture. It was a

chance to hear colleagues one had never before heard give a

course lecture.

The lecturer's problem was how to present a few works

while distilling what one thinks to be vital to one's trade to an

interested but untutored audience. The results were often

surprising. The situation altered what some of us were pre-

pared to profess. An account of the making of pictures jostled

with the larger circumstances in an unsettl ing way. Thestudents, for their part, had to listen, look, read, and write.

Their papers were commented on extensively and with care.

The first assignment was simply to try to describe a work in

the University Art Museum; the second to analyze one of the

set readings; the third was on a single artis t; the fourth on the

difference made by the modes of presentation of art; the fifth a

critique of one lecture; and the last a return, with the course

under one's belt, so to speak, to attend to an object, any

object, of one's choice with newly acquired skills consciously

in play.

The course appears to have been a success. A number

of students want to become art history majors or, even better

(to my way of thinking), to take up a double major adding art

history to, for example, history, English, or psychology. The

final papers were objectively better than the first, and the

students knew that they had learned to write about art. The

professors, both inside and outside the department, are will-

ing to teach it again.

From the students' point of view (I am basing myself

here on an open discussion we had on the last day and on the

student protocols required at Berkeley for every course), the

greatest loss was the absence of weekly sections, not because

of the teaching, it seems, but because they missed getting toknow their fellow students. I was much taken by a young

women dressed in black, midway back in the classroom, who

protested that one looked at art by oneself and that the

pleasure of this course was that it enabled one to learn how to

do that with a minimum of interference. But next time we

shall find some way at the beginning of the semester of

making the s tudents feel they are part of a course community.

In the first weeks of the course, we shall try to arrange for

groups of them to meet. The problem of size is, of course, like

much else as I warned at the start, a local matter. Berkeley is

a huge campus, and large lecture courses are as suspect as

they are frequent.

Surprisingly, perhaps, students did not regret the ab-

sence of chronology. An advantage of Berkeley's ad hoc mix of

introductory courses is that, in contrast to this new course,

beginnings to Giotto has retained a chronological presenta-

tion with a more traditional emphasis on learning names and

dates. Our students can experience an alternative structure.

But faced with so many different lecturers and no

determining chronological narrative, they did want some help

in tying things together. I found that the interconnections

7/27/2019 The Making of History of Art 15

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-making-of-history-of-art-15 5/5