FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W249918065> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W249918065 startingPage "1" @default.
• W249918065 abstract "Just what is it makes English artwriting so different, so appealing? Review of: Mark A. Cheetham, Artwriting, Nation, and Cosmopolitanism in Britain: The 'Englishness' of English Art Theory since the Eighteenth Century, Farnham, Surrey, UK: Ashgate, 2012, 182pp., 4 col. Plates, 25 b.&w. illus., $104.95, ISBN 978-1-4094-2073-6While accurate and ultimately informative, the title of Mark A. Cheetham's latest book will leave many readers guessing. Here is a beastly assemblage of terms art historians have tended to keep in separate cages: nation and cosmopolitanism, Britain and England, and hideous hippogriff named English art theory. To suggest the enormity of Cheetham's task and the importance of his thesis, I'd like to begin with an episode from the book's second chapter. In 1935 Clive Bell published an essay titled next in art? in which the Bloomsbury critic argued only those English painters who came under the influence of Cezanne and the Post- Impressionists seem able to perceive what the English tradition is.(90) What on earth is Bell talking about? How could the importation of French avant-garde practices serve to authenticate English art traditions? This is the kind of language game Cheetham delights in, and it provides one convoluted instance among many of the 'nation' and national character in English artwriting from the eighteenth-century to the present. We easily forget Cheetham argues that thinking through the frame of the nation is more than a simple expedient and not only a bad habit.(2) This book provides an autopsy on the concept of nationhood in English artwriting, and it finds essentialistic terms like however much we might like to bury them in the ground, keep returning like Frankenstein's monster to stalk 'international' art fairs and 'world art history7. Cheetham concludes If we have objections to the nation as a category or to its supposed affinities with colonialism, for example, we need to know the history and theoretical implications of artwriting's fixation with nation.(143)If Cheetham's title is a bit unwieldy, the book itself is a model of concision and clarity. This could have been a very thick tome, with a nearly infinite number of twists and turns in the cultural discourse of nationhood. It takes considerable discipline, for example, to limit an analysis of John Ruskin's voluminous writings to just five pages (62-7), and to do so without sacrificing Ruskin's central place in English artwriting. The book is composed of two main chapters ordered chronologically. The first covers English artwriting from Bainbrigg Buckeridge's An Essay Towards an English School of Painting (1706) to William Morris's writings from the 1880s. The second chapter covers English artwriting during the twentieth century. Cheetham embraces David Carrier's term 'artwriting' to include the full range of art theory, art history, aesthetics, and art criticism. As Cheetham notes, While it is often important to acknowledge a distinction in classification between, say, aesthetics and art criticism, difference must be historicized rather than presented as a definition. My aim in using this inclusive term is to avoid pre- judging what counts as a 'theoretical' approach in English artwriting.(11 n.l) One of Cheetham's central claims is art writers invariably possess a theoretical frame of reference, even those who flaunt a casual, unsystematic approach. common-sense empiricism is one particularly common default in English artwriting, and it constitutes, at the very least, a popularization of John Locke's epistemology. Cheetham's inclusiveness paradoxically results in a concise history of English artwriting in which nationhood and national identity recur as fundamental tropes and conceptual frames of reference.Chapter one is titled Englishness, Foreignness, and Empire in British Artwriting, c. 1700-1900, and it opens with the claim A persistent danger in discussions of national identity is to give such constructions too much or too little credence. …" @default.
• W249918065 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W249918065 creator A5052985038 @default.
• W249918065 date "2012-12-01" @default.
• W249918065 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W249918065 title "Just What Is It That Makes English Artwriting So Different, So Appealing?" @default.
• W249918065 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W249918065 type Work @default.
• W249918065 sameAs 249918065 @default.
• W249918065 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W249918065 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W249918065 hasAuthorship W249918065A5052985038 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C124952713 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C142362112 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C205783811 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C2524010 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C2777075199 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C2780861071 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C52119013 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W249918065 hasConcept C95457728 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C107038049 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C124952713 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C142362112 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C144024400 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C17744445 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C199539241 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C205783811 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C2524010 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C2777075199 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C2780861071 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C33923547 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C52119013 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C94625758 @default.
• W249918065 hasConceptScore W249918065C95457728 @default.
• W249918065 hasIssue "7" @default.
• W249918065 hasLocation W2499180651 @default.
• W249918065 hasOpenAccess W249918065 @default.
• W249918065 hasPrimaryLocation W2499180651 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W104250473 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W134732835 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W138036500 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W1522750098 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W1566625497 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W1592282339 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W1604595356 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W1990530621 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W2036519653 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W2077717126 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W2079241643 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W2094967645 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W2184191001 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W225035509 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W2335130977 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W2504539312 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W2777786641 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W347555137 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W349772703 @default.
• W249918065 hasRelatedWork W2601967756 @default.
• W249918065 isParatext "false" @default.
• W249918065 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W249918065 magId "249918065" @default.
• W249918065 workType "article" @default.