十八世纪漫长时期的雕塑估价:材料与技术

IF 0.3 3区 艺术学 0 ART
M. G. Sullivan
{"title":"十八世纪漫长时期的雕塑估价:材料与技术","authors":"M. G. Sullivan","doi":"10.3828/sj.2023.32.4.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1712 the sale catalogue of John Nost’s studio defined the value of sculpture as lying in the intrinsic value of materials, the performance of the artist, and the costs and complexity of sculptural production. This article looks at how these values of materials and making shifted over the course of the following 150 years through specific examples of materials – lead and granite – that gained and then lost value; and how production processes that streamlined sculptural production, notably James Tulloch’s marble works, were first celebrated and then seen as anathema to sculptural value. The article argues for the malleability of sculptural value systems in the long eighteenth century, and the need to understand sculptural value in materials and production in relation to economic and technological history.","PeriodicalId":21666,"journal":{"name":"Sculpture Journal","volume":" 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Valuing sculpture in the long eighteenth century: materials and technology\",\"authors\":\"M. G. Sullivan\",\"doi\":\"10.3828/sj.2023.32.4.02\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 1712 the sale catalogue of John Nost’s studio defined the value of sculpture as lying in the intrinsic value of materials, the performance of the artist, and the costs and complexity of sculptural production. This article looks at how these values of materials and making shifted over the course of the following 150 years through specific examples of materials – lead and granite – that gained and then lost value; and how production processes that streamlined sculptural production, notably James Tulloch’s marble works, were first celebrated and then seen as anathema to sculptural value. The article argues for the malleability of sculptural value systems in the long eighteenth century, and the need to understand sculptural value in materials and production in relation to economic and technological history.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21666,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sculpture Journal\",\"volume\":\" 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sculpture Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3828/sj.2023.32.4.02\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"艺术学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ART\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sculpture Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3828/sj.2023.32.4.02","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ART","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1712年,约翰·诺斯特(John Nost)工作室的销售目录将雕塑的价值定义为材料的内在价值、艺术家的表现以及雕塑制作的成本和复杂性。本文通过具体的材料例子——铅和花岗岩——来考察这些材料和制作的价值是如何在接下来的150年里发生变化的,这些材料先是增值,然后又贬值;以及简化雕塑制作的生产过程,特别是詹姆斯·塔洛克的大理石作品,最初是如何受到欢迎的,然后被视为雕塑价值的诅咒。本文论证了雕塑价值体系在漫长的18世纪的延展性,以及理解与经济和技术历史相关的材料和生产中的雕塑价值的必要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Valuing sculpture in the long eighteenth century: materials and technology
In 1712 the sale catalogue of John Nost’s studio defined the value of sculpture as lying in the intrinsic value of materials, the performance of the artist, and the costs and complexity of sculptural production. This article looks at how these values of materials and making shifted over the course of the following 150 years through specific examples of materials – lead and granite – that gained and then lost value; and how production processes that streamlined sculptural production, notably James Tulloch’s marble works, were first celebrated and then seen as anathema to sculptural value. The article argues for the malleability of sculptural value systems in the long eighteenth century, and the need to understand sculptural value in materials and production in relation to economic and technological history.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
×
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