Hildegard von Bingen’s Scivias in Weimar Germany: Media Theory by Hand

IF 0.2 2区 文学 N/A LITERATURE
Sonja Drimmer
{"title":"Hildegard von Bingen’s Scivias in Weimar Germany: Media Theory by Hand","authors":"Sonja Drimmer","doi":"10.1215/00267929-10779255","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Between 1929 and 1930 a feud over the legitimacy of reproductions of works of art erupted in the pages of the culture periodical Der Kreis. Later dubbed the Hamburg Facsimile Debate, the dispute involved many of the day’s most eminent curators and academics in art and art history and became a focal point for emerging ideas about authenticity and the educative impact of the replica in the Weimar Republic. Even as the intelligentsia were publicly quarreling over the epistemological stakes of the facsimile, four nuns at Eibingen Abbey were meticulously hand-copying the most renowned illuminated twelfth-century manuscript of Hildegard von Bingen’s visionary summa, Scivias. This essay pits the Facsimile Debate against the facsimile craft of the Eibingen nuns, situating both within the context of new reproductive technologies devised specifically for representing medieval artifacts. It argues for a historicizing approach to the notion of authenticity, which bears on how we think about mediation and the surrogate in our research and teaching today.","PeriodicalId":44947,"journal":{"name":"MODERN LANGUAGE QUARTERLY","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MODERN LANGUAGE QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00267929-10779255","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Between 1929 and 1930 a feud over the legitimacy of reproductions of works of art erupted in the pages of the culture periodical Der Kreis. Later dubbed the Hamburg Facsimile Debate, the dispute involved many of the day’s most eminent curators and academics in art and art history and became a focal point for emerging ideas about authenticity and the educative impact of the replica in the Weimar Republic. Even as the intelligentsia were publicly quarreling over the epistemological stakes of the facsimile, four nuns at Eibingen Abbey were meticulously hand-copying the most renowned illuminated twelfth-century manuscript of Hildegard von Bingen’s visionary summa, Scivias. This essay pits the Facsimile Debate against the facsimile craft of the Eibingen nuns, situating both within the context of new reproductive technologies devised specifically for representing medieval artifacts. It argues for a historicizing approach to the notion of authenticity, which bears on how we think about mediation and the surrogate in our research and teaching today.
希尔德加德-冯-宾根在魏玛德国的 Scivias:手工媒体理论
1929 年至 1930 年间,在文化期刊《Der Kreis》的版面上爆发了一场关于艺术品复制品合法性的争论。这场争论后来被称为 "汉堡复制辩论",当时艺术和艺术史领域最著名的策展人和学者都参与其中,并成为魏玛共和国关于真伪和复制品教育影响的新观点的焦点。就在知识分子公开争论摹本在认识论上的利害关系时,艾宾根修道院的四位修女正在一丝不苟地手抄十二世纪最著名的希尔德加德-冯-宾根(Hildegard von Bingen)的幻想总纲《斯基维亚》(Scivias)的彩饰手稿。这篇文章将 "摹本辩论 "与艾宾根修女的摹本工艺对立起来,将二者置于专为表现中世纪文物而设计的新复制技术的背景下。文章主张用一种历史化的方法来看待真实性的概念,这关系到我们在今天的研究和教学中如何看待中介和替代品。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: MLQ focuses on change, both in literary practice and within the profession of literature itself. The journal is open to essays on literary change from the Middle Ages to the present and welcomes theoretical reflections on the relationship of literary change or historicism to feminism, ethnic studies, cultural materialism, discourse analysis, and all other forms of representation and cultural critique. Seeing texts as the depictions, agents, and vehicles of change, MLQ targets literature as a commanding and vital force.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信