"Let me see?"

From the shift of the linear to the painterly, the ideas of plane and recessions, the open versus the closed, the multiplicity versus the unity, to the interrogations of the two clarities, Heinrich Wolfflin offers a wealth of insight and amazing contributions that still hold today as some of the most central ideas for the appreciation of the arts and the alleged transformation from the Classical to the Baroque . As much as I am not eager to read the work of many aesthetic theorists, and as much as Wolfflin did not want to be considered a theorist, I must admit to be mesmerized by his “readings” of artworks. Wolfflin seemed to have been the one who taught us how to see. His theory of the five precepts mentioned above seem now so “self-evident”, that we could not imagine how to envisioned Art History otherwise.

However, what strikes me as fascinating, is the importance of the idea of the experience of seeing. This concept is so elusive and personal, that to theorize (or not) about the experience of seeing and molding it into a group of general ideas can seem extremely difficult. In other words how dare someone try to teach me how to see. Even if I am aware that it was certainly not by malicious intent Wolfflin appeared to command a certain way of seeing. I must also admit to have been a bit disappointed with some of the later Aesthetic Experientalists who appeared to behave in a Talibanesque voice when they offered “their view” on seeing. I can easily understand and respect the intellectualization of the experience of seeing but I can hardly accept that there is only one way to see. Wolfflin certainly did not see things the same way Rudolf Arnheim did.












Bia, Illegitimate Daughter of Cosimo I de' Medici, c.1542
Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence, Italy









Frans Hals, Pekelharing “The Jolly Toper”, c.1629

imitation and style

I agree with Wolfflin that "the personal style must b added the style of the school, the country, and the race." (P7) " Different time give birth to different art. Epoch and race interact. We must first establish how many general traits a style contains before we can give it the name of a national style a special sense."(P9) Wofflin uses Italian Renaissance and the baroque as examples to illustrate his ideas. But among his writings, i am interested with the section of "Imitation and Decoration", because they represent a rational psychological process.
I believe that all artists has went through the period of imitation, and that has bothered many of us. We learnt how to imitate others when we were kids, and it is natural to humans. When we start practicing art, nearly all the art around us contradicts us. when we imitate somebody's art, at least we agree with something in that person, either the skill or the concept. When the imitation accumulate to a certain level, we want to do some "changes", since we have our own life experience and our own believes. However, whatever the changes, the past always continued nature imitation.

Art History and its visual counterpart

With the benefit of time and hindsight, there is much we can disagree in Wofflin's writings. Yet credit is due where it is due. The past readings in our class have definitely shed more insight into my understanding of Wofflin's phenomenology. Wofflin is obviously associated as one of the early fathers of Art History, but now it's very clear that his interpretation of Western Art History runs parallel with his notion of the history of human vision: "Vision itself has its history" (p.11). This in part exemplifies how this painting (take note of the spinning wheel) by Velazquez in 17th century Spain:



occured independently yet simultaneously (more or less) with this "painterly" painting by the Dutch Judith Lyster (a woman even!):



There is merit to Wofflin's trajectory, yet I have to wonder if it is correct in articulating that human vision has evolved when rather it is the human knowledge of vision that led to new ways of seeing and artistic creation.

More contemporary ties?

As an artist I always try to find how older theories can relate to contemporary artworks. This recent article in the NYT's offers some insight into the issue.
"The Boom Is Over. Long Live the Art!"
By HOLLAND COTTER
"Why not make studio training an interdisciplinary experience, crossing over into sociology, anthropology, psychology, philosophy, poetry and theology? Why not build into your graduate program a work-study semester that takes students out of the art world entirely and places them in hospitals, schools and prisons, sometimes in-extremis environments, i.e. real life? My guess is that if you did, American art would look very different than it does today.

Such changes would require new ways of thinking and writing about art..." and a rethinking of past theories like empathy?

Donald Weismann, Vincent Scully Robert Venturi, and Colin Rowe are mentioned by Mark Jarzombek as "a few of the better known practitioners of empathetic see-
ing." This article is from 1994 so maybe we can come up with a new more current list.


"Helicopter" 1959 Weismann
Bank Robert Venturi

Wolfflin in the 21st Century

I thought it would interesting to try to apply Wolfflin's categories of the Classic and Baroque to a 17th c. American painting and a 21st c. installation piece by Kiki Smith both at the de Young Museum.

The Mason Children of 1670 demonstrates Wolfflin's principles of linearity, the development of a 2-d plane, closed composition, multiplicity and unity and absolute clarity of the subject.

Kiki Smith incorporated copper silhouettes of 2 of the figures from this painting into an installation piece that was commissioned for the re-opening of the de Young in 2005. They are framed by a deconstructed aluminum casting of a cardboard box. To the left are 200 glass teardrops hung from the ceiling by wire threads. When viewed at eye level from a 2nd story vantage point, this piece still exemplifies some of the classic elements of the original painting. But when seen from below, on the first floor of the contemporary gallery, it explodes into a shifting semblance in 3 dimensional space demonstrating Wolfflin's Baroque in an artwork of the 21st century.