Meaning in the Visual Arts

by Erwin Panofsky

Since its original publication, Erwin Panofsky's Meaning in the Visual Arts has been standard reading for students of art history. It is both an introduction to the study of art and, for those with more specialized interests, a profound discussion of art and life in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Panofsky's historical technique reveals an abundance of detail, detail he skillfully relates to the life and work of individual painters and their times. The papers in this volume represent a cross-section of Panofsky's major work. Included are selections from his well-known Studies in Iconology and The Life and Art of Albrecht Dürer, plus an introduction and an epilogue. "The History of Art as a Humanistic Discipline" and "Three Decades of Art History in the United States: Impressions of a Transplanted European" as well as pieces written especially for this collection. All display Panofsky's vast erudition and deep commitment to a humanistic conception of art and art history.

Genres: Art, Art History, Nonfiction, History, Philosophy, Essays, Theory

407 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1955

About the author

Erwin Panofsky was a German art historian, whose academic career was pursued almost entirely in the U.S. after the rise of the Nazi regime. In 1935, while teaching concurrently at New York University and Princeton University (something he continued to do his entire career), he was invited to join the faculty of the newly formed Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton. From 1947 to 1948 Panofsky was the Charles Eliot Norton professor at Harvard University.

Panofsky's work remains highly influential in the modern academic study of iconography. Many of his works remain in print, including Studies in Iconology: Humanist Themes in the Art of the Renaissance (1939), and his eponymous 1943 study of Albrecht Dürer. His work has greatly influenced the theory of taste developed by French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu, in books such as The Rules of Art or Distinction. In particular, Bourdieu first adapted his notion of habitus from Panofsky's Gothic Architecture and Scholasticism.

Reviews

[Negar Afsharmanesh · Rating 5 out of 5]

کتاب ترجمهٔ سه مقالهٔ بنیادین اروین پانوفسکی یکی از برجسته‌ترین مورخان هنر سدهٔ بیستم است. سه مقالهٔ کتاب حاضر ترجمهٔ مقدمهٔ کتاب و دو فصل نخستین آن است و انتخاب این سه مقاله از این‌رو صورت گرفت که به‌نظر می‌رسد به اساسی‌ترین موضوعات موردنظر پانوفسکی در تاریخ هنر می‌پردازند و حاوی مطالب ارزنده‌ای برای پژوهشگران این رشته هستند. محتوا خیلی مفید از و از مباحث فلسفی شروع کرده است و به مباحث اولیه هنری مخصوصا هنر های تجسمی وارد شده است و این دلیلی است که این کتاب را برای من خیلی مفید و جذاب کرده است.

[Mariah · Rating 3 out of 5]

the authority on the subject, but reading him makes my head ache.

[Jessica Ohara · Rating 5 out of 5]

A leitura não é o que eu chamaria de fácil, bem longe disso. As milhares de notas deixam tudo mais cansativo em um tema já bastante denso. Mas ao final é possível perceber que todos os recursos foram necessários para o entendimento do assunto porque por mais labiríntico que pareçam os caminhos escolhidos conseguem levar a uma clareza sobre o tema, o que eu acho que é o mais importante nesse tipo de livro.

[Carolinalotus · Rating 5 out of 5]

Panofsky zavedl termín tzv. "kosmos kultury", což označuje časoprostorovou strukturu (chaos, ne kontinuita; podobně jako Warburgova "formule pathosu"). Nejdříve pozorujeme a zkoumáme, pak dekódujeme a interpretujeme a nakonec výsledky třídíme a uspořádáváme do koherentního systému (to podobné popsal také Marc Bloch v Obraně historie). Panofsky tvrdí, že čím vyváženější je poměr ideje a formy, tím patrnější je obsah v díle. Jinými slovy, čím víc forma souhlasí se záměrem/námětem, tím zřetelnější bude motiv.

Definuje umělecké dílo jako člověkem zhotovený předmět, jenž vyžaduje estetickou konzumaci a může fungovat jako nositel sdělení nebo nástroj. Dílo má pak 3 složky: materializovanou formu, ideu (námět) a obsah. Divák do percepce zařazuje jak přirozenou senzitivitu, tak vizuální školení, tak i kulturní vybavení. Dále rozlišuje znalce a historika a humanitní vědy řadí vedle přírodních, přičemž obé se doplňují.

Rozlišuje ikonografii, která se zabývá námětem a ikonologii, která se zabývá významem a zároveň integruje jiné metody, tudíž vychází ze syntézy a ne analýzy!. Tento význam může být: 1)prvotní neboli přirozený, 2)druhotný neboli konveční a 3)vnitřní význam neboli obsah.

Ustanovuje zásadní metodologiský postup: 1)předikonografický popis (potřeba praktické zkušenosti a dějiny stylu) 2)ikonografický rozbor (zde je potřeba znát, dle Panofskyho, literární prameny) 3)ikonolickou interpretaci (a zde mít syntetickou intuici, která je potřeba k diagnostice).

Přejímání motivu (např. křesťanstvím motivy klasické) nazývá ikonografickou afinitou. Dle Panofskyho středověk nepřihlížel ke klasickým formám, protože neměl dostatečný distanc a chyběla návaznost (nebylo součástí jejich kulturního kosmu). Zavádí termín "kunstwollen" což značí uměleckou tendenci (stejně jako Gombrich označuje egyptskou tendenci za snahu zobrazit stálé nikoliv jejich funkci). Rozměr se pak mění, protože bylo potřeba zobrazit pohyb. Klasifikuje egyptskou metodu jako konstrukční (pomocí mřížky), klasickou starověkou jako antropocentrickou (neprve části těla, pak celek) a středověkou jako schematickou (pomocí kružnic např.). Rozlišuje soustředění na "technickou" (středověk) nebo "objektivní"(starověk) proporci.

Knihu uzavírá výrokem, že "pokud žijeme pouze činy, emocemi nebo podněty našich pěti smyslů, vůbec nevíme, co vlastně děláme". Používá pro to metaforu muže na zemi, který má možnost jednat, ale nevidí a muže na věží, který vidí, ale nemá možnost jednat. Což je dle mého názoru velmi výstižné a skvěle to popisuje vztah divák-dílo-umělec.

[امیرمحمد حیدری · Rating 1 out of 5]

به‌دردنخور.

[Esmé Van Tol · Rating 3 out of 5]

helaas vind ik oude kunst nog steeds saai maar relatief wel interessant

[N Perrin · Rating 4 out of 5]

A charming collection of essays by a man who can be considered the progenitor of art history as we know it today.

Even for those not necessarily interested in art or its history, this guy is worth reading because he gets the spirit of the humanities (though with a slightly Kantian bent) and wraps it up in a package that captures the Disney magic of humanism.

Erudition and and interdisciplinarity at its finest.

[T D · Rating 4 out of 5]

A stunning record of art as living history. While sort of outside my knowledge base given I am only beginning to delve into the subject, I jibe jovially with what he had to emphasize in the epilogue. Specifically, the portion about believing you can introduce and teach topics beyond someone's initial understanding because even exposure sets them up for more adaptability. It's a method that's admirable and rings ever truer in the education-gutted 2020s. His remarks contrasting european versus american education systems was interesting. europe as archipelago. America as a broad table cartographed to the most inconsequential dial. Really summates their respective ethos. Humanity is a continuum across time and divinity.

[Митьо Пищова · Rating 5 out of 5]

Поредната класическа монография от поредицата ''Жалони'' на изд. ''Български художник''. Встъпителната студия на проф. Атанас Стойков е много добра, макар и поради обема си да не е способна да обхване в детайли цялостното творчество на Панофски. Преводът на Гочо Чакалов е отличен. Иначе самите студии и есета в този сборник са задължителни за всеки, изкушен от изкуството, любител (като мене), или ако сте студент, изучаващ история на изкуството в някой университет.

[Mafalda Cardeira · Rating 5 out of 5]

Essential reading for understanding of Art History. Basis of visual culture and art.

[Journey · Rating 4 out of 5]

Funny or ironic quips to lighten the reading.

[nuria ☾ · Rating 1 out of 5]

es lo peor q me han hecho leer en mi vida no entiendo NADA q está diciendo este hombre????

[persephone loves fall · Rating 4 out of 5]

Does he know there is an easier way to phrase things? Cool perspective tho

[Sananab · Rating 1 out of 5]

I enjoyed some of the earlier essays quite a bit, but his meandering, unfocused chapter on Dürer devolves into a cartoonishly patriotic rant where he gives Germany the credit for most of the Renaissance, both Italian and Netherlandish. It was such a sudden jump from boring to outlandishly stupid that I couldn't keep going.

[a duck · Rating 5 out of 5]

This volume collects several of the most important essays written by Erwin Panofsky (art historian, Princeton University and others). Among the most foundational for the field of art history is his essay on iconography and iconology, a nearly omnipresent reading in introductory art history courses.

[Brad · Rating 3 out of 5]

Really informative. Specific. The excessive footnotes made me crazy.

[Will Schumer · Rating 5 out of 5]

Based

[Steve Clark]

Edition: First edition.