nowbotantique

• The History Of Art As A Humanistic Discipline Pdf Writer Pdf
• The History Of Art As A Humanistic Discipline Pdf Writer Sample

History of art is a young discipline, which really only became a member of the humanities in this country after World War II, so that, for example, I have come here from a Department of Art in the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Virginia. The European roots of the history of art are not much older, reaching back only to the late. Philosophy as a Humanistic Discipline is one of three posthumous books by Williams to be published by Princeton University Press. In the Beginning Was the Deed: Realism and Moralism in Political Argument was published in the fall of 2005. The Sense of the Past: Essays in the History of Philosophy is being published shortly after the present volume.

Dictionary entry details

• HUMANISTIC DISCIPLINE(noun)

Sense 1

humanistic discipline[BACK TO TOP]

Meaning:

Studies intended to provide general knowledge and intellectual skills (rather than occupational or professional skills)

Classified under:

Nouns denoting cognitive processes and contents

Synonyms:

arts; humanistic discipline; humanities; liberal arts

The History Of Art As A Humanistic Discipline Pdf Writer Pdf

Context example:

the college of arts and sciences

Hypernyms ('humanistic discipline' is a kind of..):

bailiwick; branch of knowledge; discipline; field; field of study; study; subject; subject area; subject field (a branch of knowledge)

Hyponyms (each of the following is a kind of 'humanistic discipline'):

neoclassicism (revival of a classical style (in art or literature or architecture or music) but from a new perspective or with a new motivation)

philosophy (the rational investigation of questions about existence and knowledge and ethics)

literary study (the humanistic study of literature)

library science (the study of the principles and practices of library administration)

linguistics; philology (the humanistic study of language and literature)

musicology (the scholarly and scientific study of music)

Sinology (the study of Chinese history and language and culture)

The History Of Art As A Humanistic Discipline Pdf Writer Sample

stemmatics; stemmatology (the humanistic discipline that attempts to reconstruct the transmission of a text (especially a text in manuscript form) on the basis of relations between the various surviving manuscripts (sometimes using cladistic analysis))

trivium ((Middle Ages) an introductory curriculum at a medieval university involving grammar and logic and rhetoric; considered to be a triple way to eloquence)

Oriental Studies; Orientalism (the scholarly knowledge of Asian cultures and languages and people)

Occidentalism (the scholarly knowledge of Western cultures and languages and people)

classicalism; classicism (a movement in literature and art during the 17th and 18th centuries in Europe that favored rationality and restraint and strict forms)

Romantic Movement; Romanticism (a movement in literature and art during the late 18th and early 19th centuries that celebrated nature rather than civilization)

Download free truerta level 4 keygen - free download full version 2007. English (the discipline that studies the English language and literature)

history (the discipline that records and interprets past events involving human beings)

art history (the academic discipline that studies the development of painting and sculpture)

chronology (the determination of the actual temporal sequence of past events)

beaux arts; fine arts (the study and creation of visual works of art)

performing arts (arts or skills that require public performance)

quadrivium ((Middle Ages) a higher division of the curriculum in a medieval university involving arithmetic and music and geometry and astronomy)

This is not, of course, the zillion page essay by Panofsky, but is just my summary. No opinions, no interjections, just a shrunken version, giving you Panofsky in four pages instead of thirty.
Panofsky begins his essay by putting into perspective the ambiguity of the word 'humanitas'. The brief story of Immanuel Kant gives the reader the most swift yet clear understanding of this duality. It would seem that Kant is simply being gracious and respectful to his guest and therefor is acting 'humanely' as it were, but by unpacking this tale further we see that that single understanding of the word really holds within itself both meanings. Kant treats his doctor with the dignity and respect that he is owed, not because of his doctoral status but because of his being human, and with Kant himself eroding away despite whatever efforts the doctor tries, the both of them recognize that only God will remain eternal.
Originally, the term 'humanity' implied the distinguishing between human beings and those considered to be less than human, whether that mean dogs, goldfish, or the literal 'less than humans' known as the barbarians and slaves. But with the dawning of what we now refer to as the Middle Ages, an interest in the divine arose and man began looking at what was greater than himself. And with this recollection came the understanding that if some humans were considered subhumans, then what must humans appear as to God? And thus a new definition of 'humanitas' began infiltrating the vernacular, one that implied our certain mortality rather than superiority over one another. This new definition and conception lead to what we now call 'humanism' which Panofsky describes as maintaining our rationality and freedom while still keeping in mind our own fallibility and frailty. Thus, responsibility for ourselves and tolerance to others (p. 2).
With the rise of humanism in the Middle Ages, it is no wonder that new artistic styles emerged everywhere and played off one another versus the soon to come Renaissance which radically shifts to looking at the past as something to be reconstructed. The humanists learned and grew from what they could study of the past but didn't emulate it. As Panofsky says so beautifully, 'For, if human existence could be thought of as a means rather than an end, how much less could the records of human activity be considered as value in themselves' (p. 4). To the humanist there are two distinctions to be made: the one of nature and the one of culture. Everything falls into one category or the other, being that all things are either found in nature or are man-made, and whatever camp that might be, the situation always has to make sense at the end of the day. Meaning, that if something is new and alters our current perception, whether this be historic, scientific or what have you, then our understanding must be malleable enough (and we must be open enough) to accept this new idea (of course, pending it's accuracy). That said, the old ideas must maintain credibility, not to be confused with validity, for even if something is outdated, it lead to a new and improved thought or idea, and as a stepping stone was integral to our current knowledge. This is true for the historian as well as the scientist, who constantly learns from those who studied before him. Thus, science and culture are inevitably linked. It is impossible to know something fully without understanding it's history both scientifically and culturally. Panofsky uses a painting as an example, for if we know it scientifically to be dated in 1400, we are useless to understand it unless we know culturally and historically where it was painted. And similarly, if we know it to be from a Florentine school, we are also trapped without knowing when it was created (p. 7). This is all of course, relative, as we must resign ourselves to the fact that everything we can learn and study with and from is subject to 'humanity' in the fallible and frail sense of the word. Everything we know at the start just presupposes the end, philosophically called an 'organic situation' (p. 9).
Speaking of painting, Panofsky breaks down the term little by little until it hardly resembles itself. He calls a painting a work of art, but picks this apart to make the distinction that although something is not necessarily created with the intention of being experienced aesthetically, it still has aesthetic significance if not aesthetic value. But in order to appreciate it fully we must remove our own desires, conceptions and knowledge about the subject we view. But this is subject to the object itself, because man-made objects always have the creators intention embedded within. Of course, that intention might be for us to interpret it as we will, and so we might be at liberty to do so. Sometimes, practicality calls us to create something that does not demand any aesthetic praise and are generally 'vehicles of communication and tools or apparatuses' (p. 12). Of course, aesthetically intended objects tend to fall into one or both of these categories, for works of art are indeed vehicles of communication, candlesticks are apparatuses and tombs are either or both. But keep in mind that some things are artistic and happen to be useful, as well as can be artistic although not intended to be.
Here now is a difference between the scientist and the humanist. The scientist is able to analyze almost immediately while the humanist must re-enact and re-create mentally. As such, the scientist can simply read and interpret a book on art history but the humanist must understand what the book says in so far as it's meaning and impact on the reader. Unfortunately though, the art within the book, however scrutinizing and finicky one gets with art history (comparable to the exactness which science is subject to), most of the people to view a work of art are not going to recognize it's full capacity. And even those who do are influenced by their own agendas. But each viewer will inevitably see the form, the idea, and the content and will enjoy it to varying degrees. Thus there is no technically 'naive' beholder of a work of art. For if a person has never seen art before in his life he will be affected greatly by even the most banal painting that would leave a heavily marinated art historian aghast with disgust. The art historian's experiences have taught him to compare this work to others, to interpret the Where, When, Why, and How about the piece while the 'naive' viewer will revel in the use of color and form because it is entirely unfamiliar. But while the 'naive' viewer is radically less seasoned than the art historian, his lack of experience taints this new one. And so although one can look upon art 'naively', he is not necessarily 'naive'. And tying back into the humanistic point of view, this naivety leads toward 'appreciationism' (p. 19); the idea of learning about art without reference to anything historical, versus 'connoisseurship' where one collects art and enjoys it in respect to it's quality and condition. The 'connoisseur' knows everything to say about the art but limits himself from the details that the art historian pours himself over.
All this talk of art history could seem like a tangent away from the idea of 'humanity', and so Panofsky pumps the breaks on his essay by asking why we should consider art history as part of 'the humanities'. The question begs the practical answer that we are interested in the past, but further still, because we are interested in reality. Everything that has happened historically and scientifically was and is real life to a certain degree and thus our interest in it. Though here is another difference between the humanities and the sciences: when looking at science we capture and preserve what we observe in order to learn from it, and what we observe is constantly naturally occurring. For the humanities, we look at what once was and when we put it into practice we bring it back to life.
Maugre their differences, the humanities actually complement the sciences and vice versa. It's only that the exactness of science is a mastery and the depth of the humanities is wisdom (p. 25). Our frail and fallible human bodies leave behind frail and fallible records of our frail and fallible lives oddly turning our inescapable mortality into a kind of immortality for subsequent mortals to humanistically or scientifically observe. And so, the duality we face regarding the definition of 'humanity' still remains.
Feel like you learned something?
♥ Jo