mMK

提了幾次的Lionello Venturi, History of Art Criticism (1936第一版,紐約出版)這書真精彩{原來作序的正是上次引過其話的Gregory Battcock}.在此書第13章的Critical History of Art{名稱本身就已是一些外國學系藝術史採的新名目,有些更是把history 作眾數添},Venturi對一些的藝術史學家不滿,針對的是背後藝術史的成型的歷史性問題,如就Winckelmann,其以為他"offered a type of genetic history … deficient in the intuition of art, of its individuality, its irrationality, he made, in fact, the history of schemes and types, not of art, under the guise of art history. … he was one of the greatest obstacles to the direction of art criticism." (p.330-1)"The paradox of the death of art in the modern era has nothing to do with the definition of art given Hegel as the sensible appearance of the idea, but derives from the influence of Winckelmann upon the Hegel's taste."(p.337)結果,要在美學較弱,藝術史無甚成就(!)的法國,藝評"… was left to journalist, to the reporters of exhibitions. … in France, during the eighteenth (Diderot) … nineteenth century (Delacroix, Stendhal, Baudelaire and Zola) …"(p.334)產生了一種活於當刻的藝術評論書寫.