{"title":"文艺复兴后期的艺术和珍品柜:对朱利叶斯·冯·施洛瑟的收藏史的贡献,以及杰弗里·奇普斯·史密斯的《艺术:神圣罗马帝国的早期现代艺术和珍品柜》(评论)","authors":"Rachel Daphne Weiss","doi":"10.1353/cjm.2023.a912704","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reviewed by: Art and Curiosity Cabinets of the Late Renaissance: A Contribution to the History of Collecting by Julius von Schlosser, and: Kunstkammer: Early Modern Art and Curiosity Cabinets in the Holy Roman Empire by Jeffrey Chipps Smith Rachel Daphne Weiss Julius von Schlosser, Art and Curiosity Cabinets of the Late Renaissance: A Contribution to the History of Collecting, trans. Jonathan Blower, ed. Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann (Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, 2021), xi + 231 pp., 98 ills. Jeffrey Chipps Smith, Kunstkammer: Early Modern Art and Curiosity Cabinets in the Holy Roman Empire (London: Reaktion, 2022), 317 pp., 189 ills. Efforts to understand the macrocosm through the conceit of the microcosm may well be transhistorical, but their modern Euro-American origins can be alluringly traced to the Kunstkammer. Emerging mainly within dominions of the Holy Roman Empire during the early modern period, Kunstkammern (pl., art and curiosity cabinets) describe both physical sites of collection display and a particular orientation to the practice of collecting shared among princely patrons. Kunstkammern were fundamentally eclectic, juxtaposing works of art, natural objects, natural objects reimagined as works of art, tools, instruments, antiquities, and other miscellanea in service of complex ambitions. Such collections had microcosmic pretensions; they functioned as representations of their owner’s wealth, power, and aesthetic judgment; they triggered scientific inquiry through their wondrous and challenging materializations; and they helped to fathom and to impose order onto a cosmos destabilized by religious strife and encounters with peoples and geographies previously unknown to Europeans. Research on Kunstkammern has proliferated since the 1970s and 80s, but Julius von Schlosser’s Die Kunst- und Wunderkammern der Spätrenaissance planted the seeds of this avid interest upon its publication in 1908. Due to its hitherto untranslated state, Schlosser’s groundbreaking contribution has languished in the footnotes of Anglophone scholarship, rarely piercing the veil to become a subject of study in its own right. It is a boon, therefore, that this landmark was targeted for the Getty Research Institute’s (GRI) Texts and Documents series, appearing in translation by Jonathan Blower as Art and Curiosity Cabinets of the Late Renaissance: A Contribution to the History of Collecting with a substantial introductory essay by Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann. That this publication was closely followed by Jeffrey Chipps Smith’s Kunstkammer: Early Modern Art and Curiosity Cabinets in the Holy Roman Empire gives further cause for excitement, as Smith’s study grounds what had through a multitude of perspectives become a dauntingly expansive field of study. The GRI publication’s success lies, in part, in its treatment of Schlosser’s text as a historical document. While Kaufmann analyzes the text’s ideas about and interpretations of Kunstkammern, much of the introduction is given over to analysis of Schlosser himself. Kaufmann labors to correct a common perception of Schlosser as a marginal figure of the Vienna School, demonstrating his importance by way of his lengthy tenures at Vienna’s art museums and as a [End Page 265] professor at Universität Wien, where he supervised some of the glitterati of twentieth-century art history (Ernst Gombrich, Fritz Saxl, Charles de Tolnay, etc.). Kaufmann associates Schlosser’s theoretical dependence on the concept of court art with his terms of employment at Viennese institutions, which bound him functionally and symbolically to the Habsburg legacy. Finally, Kaufmann wrestles with the damning implications of a picture of Schlosser wearing a Nazi Party pin, but—aside from stray prejudicial comments in sync with the period’s abhorrent but more generalized forms of Eurocentric superiority—Kaufmann finds no overt manifestations of Nazi ideology in Schlosser’s writing. If one is still inclined to forge ahead with Schlosser’s text, rewards are to be reaped. His polymathic erudition is conspicuous to contemporary readers, and it produces epistemological traces as distinctive as those articulated in a Kunstkammer. The leitmotif that emerges across the chapters is Schlosser’s search for a way to define art, a desideratum born of the multimedia and cross-disciplinary chaos of the Kunstkammer. Ultimately, and rather presciently, he defines art as that which is valued for its form above all else, and he frames the act of collecting as constitutive thereof. While much is to be gained...","PeriodicalId":53903,"journal":{"name":"COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Art and Curiosity Cabinets of the Late Renaissance: A Contribution to the History of Collecting by Julius von Schlosser, and: Kunstkammer: Early Modern Art and Curiosity Cabinets in the Holy Roman Empire by Jeffrey Chipps Smith (review)\",\"authors\":\"Rachel Daphne Weiss\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/cjm.2023.a912704\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Reviewed by: Art and Curiosity Cabinets of the Late Renaissance: A Contribution to the History of Collecting by Julius von Schlosser, and: Kunstkammer: Early Modern Art and Curiosity Cabinets in the Holy Roman Empire by Jeffrey Chipps Smith Rachel Daphne Weiss Julius von Schlosser, Art and Curiosity Cabinets of the Late Renaissance: A Contribution to the History of Collecting, trans. Jonathan Blower, ed. Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann (Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, 2021), xi + 231 pp., 98 ills. Jeffrey Chipps Smith, Kunstkammer: Early Modern Art and Curiosity Cabinets in the Holy Roman Empire (London: Reaktion, 2022), 317 pp., 189 ills. Efforts to understand the macrocosm through the conceit of the microcosm may well be transhistorical, but their modern Euro-American origins can be alluringly traced to the Kunstkammer. Emerging mainly within dominions of the Holy Roman Empire during the early modern period, Kunstkammern (pl., art and curiosity cabinets) describe both physical sites of collection display and a particular orientation to the practice of collecting shared among princely patrons. Kunstkammern were fundamentally eclectic, juxtaposing works of art, natural objects, natural objects reimagined as works of art, tools, instruments, antiquities, and other miscellanea in service of complex ambitions. Such collections had microcosmic pretensions; they functioned as representations of their owner’s wealth, power, and aesthetic judgment; they triggered scientific inquiry through their wondrous and challenging materializations; and they helped to fathom and to impose order onto a cosmos destabilized by religious strife and encounters with peoples and geographies previously unknown to Europeans. Research on Kunstkammern has proliferated since the 1970s and 80s, but Julius von Schlosser’s Die Kunst- und Wunderkammern der Spätrenaissance planted the seeds of this avid interest upon its publication in 1908. Due to its hitherto untranslated state, Schlosser’s groundbreaking contribution has languished in the footnotes of Anglophone scholarship, rarely piercing the veil to become a subject of study in its own right. It is a boon, therefore, that this landmark was targeted for the Getty Research Institute’s (GRI) Texts and Documents series, appearing in translation by Jonathan Blower as Art and Curiosity Cabinets of the Late Renaissance: A Contribution to the History of Collecting with a substantial introductory essay by Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann. That this publication was closely followed by Jeffrey Chipps Smith’s Kunstkammer: Early Modern Art and Curiosity Cabinets in the Holy Roman Empire gives further cause for excitement, as Smith’s study grounds what had through a multitude of perspectives become a dauntingly expansive field of study. The GRI publication’s success lies, in part, in its treatment of Schlosser’s text as a historical document. While Kaufmann analyzes the text’s ideas about and interpretations of Kunstkammern, much of the introduction is given over to analysis of Schlosser himself. Kaufmann labors to correct a common perception of Schlosser as a marginal figure of the Vienna School, demonstrating his importance by way of his lengthy tenures at Vienna’s art museums and as a [End Page 265] professor at Universität Wien, where he supervised some of the glitterati of twentieth-century art history (Ernst Gombrich, Fritz Saxl, Charles de Tolnay, etc.). Kaufmann associates Schlosser’s theoretical dependence on the concept of court art with his terms of employment at Viennese institutions, which bound him functionally and symbolically to the Habsburg legacy. Finally, Kaufmann wrestles with the damning implications of a picture of Schlosser wearing a Nazi Party pin, but—aside from stray prejudicial comments in sync with the period’s abhorrent but more generalized forms of Eurocentric superiority—Kaufmann finds no overt manifestations of Nazi ideology in Schlosser’s writing. If one is still inclined to forge ahead with Schlosser’s text, rewards are to be reaped. His polymathic erudition is conspicuous to contemporary readers, and it produces epistemological traces as distinctive as those articulated in a Kunstkammer. The leitmotif that emerges across the chapters is Schlosser’s search for a way to define art, a desideratum born of the multimedia and cross-disciplinary chaos of the Kunstkammer. Ultimately, and rather presciently, he defines art as that which is valued for its form above all else, and he frames the act of collecting as constitutive thereof. While much is to be gained...\",\"PeriodicalId\":53903,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/cjm.2023.a912704\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMITATUS-A JOURNAL OF MEDIEVAL AND RENAISSANCE STUDIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/cjm.2023.a912704","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"MEDIEVAL & RENAISSANCE STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
由:文艺复兴晚期的艺术和珍品柜:对收藏史的贡献由朱利叶斯·冯·施洛瑟,和:Kunstkammer:早期现代艺术和珍品柜在神圣罗马帝国由杰弗里·奇普斯·史密斯雷切尔·达芙妮·韦斯朱利叶斯·冯·施洛瑟,文艺复兴晚期的艺术和珍品柜:对收藏史的贡献,翻译。乔纳森·布洛尔主编,托马斯·达科斯塔·考夫曼(洛杉矶:盖蒂研究所,2021年),xi + 231页,98页。杰弗里·奇普斯·史密斯,《艺术:神圣罗马帝国的早期现代艺术和珍奇柜》(伦敦:Reaktion, 2022), 317页,189页。通过微观世界的自负来理解宏观世界的努力可能是超越历史的,但它们的现代欧美起源可以诱人地追溯到艺术。Kunstkammern主要出现在近代早期神圣罗马帝国的领土内,它既描述了收藏展示的物理场所,也描述了王子赞助人之间共享的收藏实践的特定方向。Kunstkammern基本上是折衷的,并置艺术作品,自然物体,自然物体重新想象为艺术作品,工具,仪器,古董和其他杂项服务于复杂的野心。这样的收藏有微观上的自命不凡;它们代表着主人的财富、权力和审美;他们通过他们奇妙和具有挑战性的物化引发了科学探究;他们帮助理解并将秩序强加给一个因宗教冲突和遭遇欧洲人以前不知道的民族和地理而不稳定的宇宙。自20世纪70年代和80年代以来,对艺术艺术的研究激增,但朱利叶斯·冯·施洛瑟(Julius von Schlosser)在1908年出版的《艺术与艺术艺术》(Die Kunst- und Wunderkammern der Spätrenaissance)播下了这种狂热兴趣的种子。由于其迄今未被翻译,施洛瑟的开创性贡献在英语学术的脚注中受到冷落,很少突破面纱,成为自己研究的主题。因此,这一地标成为盖蒂研究所(GRI)文本和文献系列的目标,这是一个福音,由乔纳森·布洛尔(Jonathan Blower)翻译为文艺复兴晚期的艺术和好奇柜:对收藏史的贡献,并附有托马斯·达科斯塔·考夫曼(Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann)的大量介绍文章。紧随其后的是杰弗里·奇普斯·史密斯(Jeffrey Chipps Smith)的《艺术:神圣罗马帝国的早期现代艺术和珍奇柜》(Kunstkammer),这进一步引起了人们的兴奋,因为史密斯的研究表明,通过多种视角,它已经成为一个令人生畏的广阔研究领域。GRI出版物的成功部分在于它将Schlosser的文本作为历史文献来处理。虽然考夫曼分析了文本对艺术的看法和解释,但大部分引言都是对施洛瑟本人的分析。考夫曼努力纠正Schlosser作为维也纳学派边缘人物的普遍看法,通过他在维也纳艺术博物馆的长期任期和作为Universität维也纳教授的方式证明了他的重要性,在那里他监督了一些二十世纪艺术史上的显要人物(恩斯特·贡布里希,弗里茨·萨克斯,查尔斯·德·托尔内等)。考夫曼将Schlosser对宫廷艺术概念的理论依赖与他在维也纳机构的就业条件联系在一起,这在功能上和象征意义上将他与哈布斯堡遗产联系在一起。最后,考夫曼与施洛瑟戴着纳粹党别针的照片的诅咒含义进行了斗争,但是,除了与那个时期令人憎恶但更普遍的以欧洲为中心的优越感相一致的偶然偏见评论之外,考夫曼在施洛瑟的作品中没有发现纳粹意识形态的明显表现。如果一个人仍然倾向于继续阅读施洛瑟的文本,那么他将获得回报。他的博学对当代读者来说是引人注目的,它产生了认识论的痕迹,就像在艺术作品中所表达的那样独特。贯穿全书各个章节的主题是Schlosser对艺术定义方式的探索,这是艺术界在多媒体和跨学科混乱中产生的一种渴望。最终,而且相当有先见之明的是,他将艺术定义为其形式高于一切的价值,并将收藏行为定义为艺术的组成部分。虽然我们可以从中获益良多……
Art and Curiosity Cabinets of the Late Renaissance: A Contribution to the History of Collecting by Julius von Schlosser, and: Kunstkammer: Early Modern Art and Curiosity Cabinets in the Holy Roman Empire by Jeffrey Chipps Smith (review)
Reviewed by: Art and Curiosity Cabinets of the Late Renaissance: A Contribution to the History of Collecting by Julius von Schlosser, and: Kunstkammer: Early Modern Art and Curiosity Cabinets in the Holy Roman Empire by Jeffrey Chipps Smith Rachel Daphne Weiss Julius von Schlosser, Art and Curiosity Cabinets of the Late Renaissance: A Contribution to the History of Collecting, trans. Jonathan Blower, ed. Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann (Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, 2021), xi + 231 pp., 98 ills. Jeffrey Chipps Smith, Kunstkammer: Early Modern Art and Curiosity Cabinets in the Holy Roman Empire (London: Reaktion, 2022), 317 pp., 189 ills. Efforts to understand the macrocosm through the conceit of the microcosm may well be transhistorical, but their modern Euro-American origins can be alluringly traced to the Kunstkammer. Emerging mainly within dominions of the Holy Roman Empire during the early modern period, Kunstkammern (pl., art and curiosity cabinets) describe both physical sites of collection display and a particular orientation to the practice of collecting shared among princely patrons. Kunstkammern were fundamentally eclectic, juxtaposing works of art, natural objects, natural objects reimagined as works of art, tools, instruments, antiquities, and other miscellanea in service of complex ambitions. Such collections had microcosmic pretensions; they functioned as representations of their owner’s wealth, power, and aesthetic judgment; they triggered scientific inquiry through their wondrous and challenging materializations; and they helped to fathom and to impose order onto a cosmos destabilized by religious strife and encounters with peoples and geographies previously unknown to Europeans. Research on Kunstkammern has proliferated since the 1970s and 80s, but Julius von Schlosser’s Die Kunst- und Wunderkammern der Spätrenaissance planted the seeds of this avid interest upon its publication in 1908. Due to its hitherto untranslated state, Schlosser’s groundbreaking contribution has languished in the footnotes of Anglophone scholarship, rarely piercing the veil to become a subject of study in its own right. It is a boon, therefore, that this landmark was targeted for the Getty Research Institute’s (GRI) Texts and Documents series, appearing in translation by Jonathan Blower as Art and Curiosity Cabinets of the Late Renaissance: A Contribution to the History of Collecting with a substantial introductory essay by Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann. That this publication was closely followed by Jeffrey Chipps Smith’s Kunstkammer: Early Modern Art and Curiosity Cabinets in the Holy Roman Empire gives further cause for excitement, as Smith’s study grounds what had through a multitude of perspectives become a dauntingly expansive field of study. The GRI publication’s success lies, in part, in its treatment of Schlosser’s text as a historical document. While Kaufmann analyzes the text’s ideas about and interpretations of Kunstkammern, much of the introduction is given over to analysis of Schlosser himself. Kaufmann labors to correct a common perception of Schlosser as a marginal figure of the Vienna School, demonstrating his importance by way of his lengthy tenures at Vienna’s art museums and as a [End Page 265] professor at Universität Wien, where he supervised some of the glitterati of twentieth-century art history (Ernst Gombrich, Fritz Saxl, Charles de Tolnay, etc.). Kaufmann associates Schlosser’s theoretical dependence on the concept of court art with his terms of employment at Viennese institutions, which bound him functionally and symbolically to the Habsburg legacy. Finally, Kaufmann wrestles with the damning implications of a picture of Schlosser wearing a Nazi Party pin, but—aside from stray prejudicial comments in sync with the period’s abhorrent but more generalized forms of Eurocentric superiority—Kaufmann finds no overt manifestations of Nazi ideology in Schlosser’s writing. If one is still inclined to forge ahead with Schlosser’s text, rewards are to be reaped. His polymathic erudition is conspicuous to contemporary readers, and it produces epistemological traces as distinctive as those articulated in a Kunstkammer. The leitmotif that emerges across the chapters is Schlosser’s search for a way to define art, a desideratum born of the multimedia and cross-disciplinary chaos of the Kunstkammer. Ultimately, and rather presciently, he defines art as that which is valued for its form above all else, and he frames the act of collecting as constitutive thereof. While much is to be gained...
期刊介绍:
Comitatus: A Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies publishes articles by graduate students and recent PhDs in any field of medieval and Renaissance studies. The journal maintains a tradition of gathering work from across disciplines, with a special interest in articles that have an interdisciplinary or cross-cultural scope.