数字化文化:数字艺术史的史学视角

IF 0.3 0 ART
Anna Näslund Dahlgren, A. Wasielewski
{"title":"数字化文化:数字艺术史的史学视角","authors":"Anna Näslund Dahlgren, A. Wasielewski","doi":"10.1080/01973762.2021.1928864","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Art museums began using computers to help organize, catalogue, and coordinate their collections as early as the 1960s. In more recent times, art historians have consolidated the use of digital tools in the discipline within the emerging field of Digital Art History (DAH). In this historiographic study, we set out to understand DAH through an analysis of existing scholarship in the field. Our method combined both text mining and close reading of three datasets of art history journal articles published in the last decade: DAH (International Journal of Digital Art History, special issues of Visual Resources), Art History, and Art Journal. We studied the topical focus of these journals, looking at which agents, materials, and methods dominate and how they are contextualized. Based on this, we found that the subject matter and topical focus of scholarship in DAH differs significantly from scholarship in Art History or Art Journal. More specifically, the historical concerns of museums with regard to digitization still dominate DAH compared to other scholarship in the field. We argue that there are a number of historical and practical reasons for this, including early adoption of computers within museums, the need for simplicity in digitization projects, and issues of copyright. The persistence of this affiliation, in turn, raises critical questions for the future of the field of art history, including who can access art historical datasets, and how and by whom they are created.","PeriodicalId":41894,"journal":{"name":"Visual Resources","volume":"36 1","pages":"339 - 359"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cultures of Digitization: A Historiographic Perspective on Digital Art History\",\"authors\":\"Anna Näslund Dahlgren, A. Wasielewski\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01973762.2021.1928864\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Art museums began using computers to help organize, catalogue, and coordinate their collections as early as the 1960s. In more recent times, art historians have consolidated the use of digital tools in the discipline within the emerging field of Digital Art History (DAH). In this historiographic study, we set out to understand DAH through an analysis of existing scholarship in the field. Our method combined both text mining and close reading of three datasets of art history journal articles published in the last decade: DAH (International Journal of Digital Art History, special issues of Visual Resources), Art History, and Art Journal. We studied the topical focus of these journals, looking at which agents, materials, and methods dominate and how they are contextualized. Based on this, we found that the subject matter and topical focus of scholarship in DAH differs significantly from scholarship in Art History or Art Journal. More specifically, the historical concerns of museums with regard to digitization still dominate DAH compared to other scholarship in the field. We argue that there are a number of historical and practical reasons for this, including early adoption of computers within museums, the need for simplicity in digitization projects, and issues of copyright. The persistence of this affiliation, in turn, raises critical questions for the future of the field of art history, including who can access art historical datasets, and how and by whom they are created.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41894,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Visual Resources\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"339 - 359\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Visual Resources\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01973762.2021.1928864\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ART\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Visual Resources","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01973762.2021.1928864","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ART","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

早在20世纪60年代,艺术博物馆就开始使用计算机来帮助组织、编目和协调他们的藏品。近年来,艺术史学家在新兴的数字艺术史(DAH)领域中巩固了数字工具在学科中的使用。在这项史学研究中,我们开始通过对该领域现有学术的分析来理解DAH。我们的方法结合了文本挖掘和近十年来发表的艺术史期刊文章的三个数据集的仔细阅读:DAH(国际数字艺术史杂志,视觉资源特刊),艺术史和艺术杂志。我们研究了这些期刊的主题焦点,看看哪些药剂、材料和方法占主导地位,以及它们是如何被语境化的。基于此,我们发现DAH的学术研究的主题和主题焦点与艺术史或艺术期刊的学术研究有很大的不同。更具体地说,与该领域的其他学术相比,博物馆对数字化的历史关注仍然主导着DAH。我们认为,这有许多历史和现实原因,包括博物馆早期采用计算机,数字化项目简单化的需要,以及版权问题。这种联系的持续存在,反过来又为艺术史领域的未来提出了关键问题,包括谁可以访问艺术史数据集,以及如何以及由谁创建这些数据集。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cultures of Digitization: A Historiographic Perspective on Digital Art History
Art museums began using computers to help organize, catalogue, and coordinate their collections as early as the 1960s. In more recent times, art historians have consolidated the use of digital tools in the discipline within the emerging field of Digital Art History (DAH). In this historiographic study, we set out to understand DAH through an analysis of existing scholarship in the field. Our method combined both text mining and close reading of three datasets of art history journal articles published in the last decade: DAH (International Journal of Digital Art History, special issues of Visual Resources), Art History, and Art Journal. We studied the topical focus of these journals, looking at which agents, materials, and methods dominate and how they are contextualized. Based on this, we found that the subject matter and topical focus of scholarship in DAH differs significantly from scholarship in Art History or Art Journal. More specifically, the historical concerns of museums with regard to digitization still dominate DAH compared to other scholarship in the field. We argue that there are a number of historical and practical reasons for this, including early adoption of computers within museums, the need for simplicity in digitization projects, and issues of copyright. The persistence of this affiliation, in turn, raises critical questions for the future of the field of art history, including who can access art historical datasets, and how and by whom they are created.
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
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
×
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