Architecture’s Maternity: Conceiving the Mother of the Arts in the Long Nineteenth Century

IF 0.2 4区 艺术学 0 ARCHITECTURE
Elizabeth M. Keslacy
{"title":"Architecture’s Maternity: Conceiving the Mother of the Arts in the Long Nineteenth Century","authors":"Elizabeth M. Keslacy","doi":"10.1080/13264826.2023.2168712","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the latter half of the nineteenth century, architecture was regularly celebrated as “the mother of the arts.” Though most users of the phrase rarely explicated its nuances, a close reading of the contexts and debates in which it was invoked reveals the complexity, nuance, and changing implications of the deceptively simple claim. In a period when the fine and applied arts grew increasingly distinct and the practice of architecture was progressively codified and professionalized, why did architects engage in rhetoric that emphasized architecture’s affiliation with and authority over the arts? To answer this question, I examine numerous instantiations of the phrase to trace an arc in which an earlier disciplinary affiliation between architecture and the fine arts transforms into an interpersonal relationship between architects and art-workers. In so doing, I suggest that the maternal metaphor was employed in response to collectively held anxieties to invert and project them as conceptual and historical claims of affiliation, authority, and identity—precisely those characteristics of the profession that were unstable at the time.","PeriodicalId":43786,"journal":{"name":"Architectural Theory Review","volume":"26 1","pages":"345 - 371"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Architectural Theory Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13264826.2023.2168712","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In the latter half of the nineteenth century, architecture was regularly celebrated as “the mother of the arts.” Though most users of the phrase rarely explicated its nuances, a close reading of the contexts and debates in which it was invoked reveals the complexity, nuance, and changing implications of the deceptively simple claim. In a period when the fine and applied arts grew increasingly distinct and the practice of architecture was progressively codified and professionalized, why did architects engage in rhetoric that emphasized architecture’s affiliation with and authority over the arts? To answer this question, I examine numerous instantiations of the phrase to trace an arc in which an earlier disciplinary affiliation between architecture and the fine arts transforms into an interpersonal relationship between architects and art-workers. In so doing, I suggest that the maternal metaphor was employed in response to collectively held anxieties to invert and project them as conceptual and historical claims of affiliation, authority, and identity—precisely those characteristics of the profession that were unstable at the time.
建筑的母性:19世纪艺术之母的构想
摘要在19世纪后半叶,建筑经常被誉为“艺术之母”。尽管这个短语的大多数使用者很少解释它的细微差别,但仔细阅读它被引用的背景和辩论,就会发现这个看似简单的说法的复杂性、细微差别和不断变化的含义。在一个美术和应用艺术变得越来越独特,建筑实践逐渐规范化和专业化的时期,建筑师为什么要用修辞来强调建筑与艺术的联系和对艺术的权威?为了回答这个问题,我研究了这个短语的许多实例,以追溯建筑和美术之间早期的学科关系转变为建筑师和艺术工作者之间的人际关系的过程。在这样做的过程中,我建议使用母性隐喻来回应集体持有的焦虑,将其转化为从属关系、权威和身份的概念和历史主张,而这些正是当时不稳定的职业特征。
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
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
×
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