Tag Archives: Media

CFP: Pictor/Miniator: Working across media, 1250–1500, 53rd International Congress on Medieval Studies, Kalamazoo, May 10-13, 2018

michelino_molinari_da_besozzo_-_st-_luke_painting_the_virgin_-_google_art_projectCall for Papers: Pictor/Miniator: Working across media, 1250–1500, Schoenberg Institute for Manuscript Studies Sponsored Session at the 53rd International Congress on Medieval Studies, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, May 10-13, 2018
Deadline: 20 September 2017

The multimedia fluidity of artists and artisans in the later Middle Ages is an area ripe for investigation. Across diverse regions in Europe and beyond, many illuminators, both named and anonymous, engaged in forms of art-making in addition to the decoration of manuscript books. Some painted frescoes, panels, and ephemera, while others provided designs and supervised the production of stained glass, enamels, tapestries, and other objects. With some frequency, those who specialized in other media were in turn called upon to illuminate books. While modern studies have focused on individual examples of such multi-media talent, the broader implications of this intermedial fluency remain obscure: within the wider art-historical canon, manuscript illumination as an art form is largely seen as derivative or prone to influence from large-scale media.
This session seeks to re-examine the relationship between manuscript illumination and other fields of artistic endeavor in the later Middle Ages. How did artists themselves consider the differing characteristics and ontologies of these varied supports? How did painters adapt their style and working method when engaging with other media and other categories of object? Did the presence of local guild regulations curtail or encourage multi-media practice, and how did this compare region-to-region or to contexts outside of Western Europe? Beyond evident differences in scale, pricing, and technique, interesting issues arise regarding patronage and audience: how different was the clientele for manuscripts compared to that for painting, for example? How did the relative accessibility and visibility of differing art forms affect the visual solutions achieved? Is a book-bound image “freer” or more experimental than a publically visible one?
The session asks these and other questions relevant to those studying the social contexts of art production, the dynamics of reception, materiality, and the technical characteristics of objects. It seeks to be open-minded in terms of methodological approach, and aims to bring together scholars working on diverse material, in order to initiate a larger conversation that can impact the discipline of art history as a whole.
Please send proposals with a one-page abstract and a completed Participant Information Form (http://www.wmich.edu/medievalcongress/submissions) to Nicholas Herman (hermanni@upenn.edu) by 20 September 2017.

CFP: Recasting Reproduction (1500-1800) (London, 18 Nov 17)

The contested concept of “reproduction” stands at a critical nexus of
the conceptualisation of Early Modern artistic thought. The early
modern period has been characterised by the development of novel and
efficient reproduction technologies, as well as the emergence of global
empires, growing interconnectedness through trade, warfare and
conquest, and the rise of new markets and cultures of collecting. This
ethos of innovation and cultural exchange was, however, contextualised
against myriad contemporary ideologies still rooted in the values and
legends of narratives of the past. Reproduction stood at the centre of
this dichotomy. Set against the context of changing cultural tastes and
the increasingly overlapping public and private spheres,
‘reproductions’ were involved within changing viewing practices,
artistic pedagogy, acts of homage and collecting.

The idea of reproduction connotes a number of tensions: between
authenticity and counterfeit; consumption and production; innovation
and imitation; the establishment of archetype and the creation of
replica; the conceptual value of the original and the worth of the
reproduction as a novel work of art; the display of contextualised
knowledge and the de-contextualisation of the prototype. At the same
time, production is shaped historically through practices and
discourses, and has figured as a key site for analysis in the work of,
for example, Walter Benjamin, Richard Wolin, Richard Etlin, Ian Knizek
and Yvonne Sheratt. Participants are invited to explore reproduction
‘beyond Benjamin’, investigating both the technical and philosophical
implications of reproducing a work of art and seeking, where possible,
a local anchoring for the physical and conceptual processes involved.

We welcome proposals for papers that investigate the theme of
reproduction from the early modern period (c.1500-1800), including
painting, print making, sculpture, decorative arts, architecture,
graphic arts and the intersections between them. Papers can explore
artistic exchanges across geopolitical, cultural and disciplinary
divides and contributions from other disciplines, such as the history
of science and conservation, are welcome. Topics for discussion may
include, but are not limited to:

The conceptualisation and processes of reproduction and reproduction
technologies before and at the advent of ‘the mechanical’;
Reproduction in artistic traditions beyond ‘the West’;
The slippage between innovation and imitation;
Part-reproduction and the changing, manipulation and developments of
certain motifs;
Problematizing the aura of ‘authenticity’ and the ‘value’ of the
original, copies and collecting;
Fakes and the de-contextualisation of a work through its reproduction;
Reproduction within non-object based study e.g. architecture;
Theoretical alternatives and the vocabulary used to describe the
process and results of reproduction in contemporary texts.
Please send proposals of no more than 300 words along with a 150 word
biography by 6th July 2017 to kyle.leyden@courtauld.ac.uk and

Organised by Kyle Leyden, Natasha Morris and Angela Benza (The
Courtauld Institute of Art)

Reference / Quellennachweis:
CFP: Recasting Reproduction (1500–1800) (London, 18 Nov 17). In:
H-ArtHist, Jun 6, 2017. <https://arthist.net/archive/15728>.