Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Leonardo
Comments on a Re-Assessment of Rodin's 'Gates of Hell'Author(s): David CarrierSource: Leonardo, Vol. 19, No. 4 (1986), p. 359Published by: The MIT PressStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1578401 .
Accessed: 18/06/2014 01:28
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
The MIT Press and Leonardo are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toLeonardo.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 01:28:23 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
portions the 'distortions' produced by the acceleration of the observer could be confused with the 'free distortions' pro- duced by the artist. When we foresee constructions of this kind, we realize further the importance of introducing lucid and stringent procedures (and balanced judgments as to what should be done mechanically and what by eye) such as the procedures presented in Moose's article. These surely constitute invaluable contributions to the field.
Fernando R. Casas 22214 Meadowsweet Magnolia, TX 77355
U.S.A.
COMMENTS ON A RE- ASSESSMENT OF RODIN'S 'GATES
OF HELL'
In my Theoretical Perspectives section (Leonardo 19, 170-4, 1986) I confidently asserted that Rodin's Gates of Hell was "seemingly unfinished when he died". In the course of a helpful correspondence, Albert Elsen has argued with my inter-
pretation of Rosalind Krauss's account of Rodin's unfinished works [1]. Since Elsen has devoted a portion of his fruitful career to the study of Rodin and played an important role in the revival of interest in that sculptor's work, it would be rash for me to ignore his judgment. In his recent book 'The Gates of Hell' by Auguste Rodin he concludes: "to all intents and purposes The Gates of Hell were completed in terms of their form by May of 1900" [2].
Apart from this point of historical accuracy, what I would draw attention to in Elsen's book is the fascinating dis- cussion of the perhaps-inherent ambiguity of Rodin's work and the difficulty of pinning down its meaning. In the Theore- tical Perspectives section in this issue I discuss the debate between Mark Roskill and Michael Baxandall about the useful- ness of an appeal to the artist's intentions in the analysis of cubism. Not the least interesting question raised by Elsen's account of The Gates ofHell is whether or not the same problems arise in the interpretation of Rodin's art. Here Elsen's discussion of how Rodin exhibited many individual works from The Gates of Hell is of special value [3].
REFERENCES
portions the 'distortions' produced by the acceleration of the observer could be confused with the 'free distortions' pro- duced by the artist. When we foresee constructions of this kind, we realize further the importance of introducing lucid and stringent procedures (and balanced judgments as to what should be done mechanically and what by eye) such as the procedures presented in Moose's article. These surely constitute invaluable contributions to the field.
Fernando R. Casas 22214 Meadowsweet Magnolia, TX 77355
U.S.A.
COMMENTS ON A RE- ASSESSMENT OF RODIN'S 'GATES
OF HELL'
In my Theoretical Perspectives section (Leonardo 19, 170-4, 1986) I confidently asserted that Rodin's Gates of Hell was "seemingly unfinished when he died". In the course of a helpful correspondence, Albert Elsen has argued with my inter-
pretation of Rosalind Krauss's account of Rodin's unfinished works [1]. Since Elsen has devoted a portion of his fruitful career to the study of Rodin and played an important role in the revival of interest in that sculptor's work, it would be rash for me to ignore his judgment. In his recent book 'The Gates of Hell' by Auguste Rodin he concludes: "to all intents and purposes The Gates of Hell were completed in terms of their form by May of 1900" [2].
Apart from this point of historical accuracy, what I would draw attention to in Elsen's book is the fascinating dis- cussion of the perhaps-inherent ambiguity of Rodin's work and the difficulty of pinning down its meaning. In the Theore- tical Perspectives section in this issue I discuss the debate between Mark Roskill and Michael Baxandall about the useful- ness of an appeal to the artist's intentions in the analysis of cubism. Not the least interesting question raised by Elsen's account of The Gates ofHell is whether or not the same problems arise in the interpretation of Rodin's art. Here Elsen's discussion of how Rodin exhibited many individual works from The Gates of Hell is of special value [3].
REFERENCES
portions the 'distortions' produced by the acceleration of the observer could be confused with the 'free distortions' pro- duced by the artist. When we foresee constructions of this kind, we realize further the importance of introducing lucid and stringent procedures (and balanced judgments as to what should be done mechanically and what by eye) such as the procedures presented in Moose's article. These surely constitute invaluable contributions to the field.
Fernando R. Casas 22214 Meadowsweet Magnolia, TX 77355
U.S.A.
COMMENTS ON A RE- ASSESSMENT OF RODIN'S 'GATES
OF HELL'
In my Theoretical Perspectives section (Leonardo 19, 170-4, 1986) I confidently asserted that Rodin's Gates of Hell was "seemingly unfinished when he died". In the course of a helpful correspondence, Albert Elsen has argued with my inter-
pretation of Rosalind Krauss's account of Rodin's unfinished works [1]. Since Elsen has devoted a portion of his fruitful career to the study of Rodin and played an important role in the revival of interest in that sculptor's work, it would be rash for me to ignore his judgment. In his recent book 'The Gates of Hell' by Auguste Rodin he concludes: "to all intents and purposes The Gates of Hell were completed in terms of their form by May of 1900" [2].
Apart from this point of historical accuracy, what I would draw attention to in Elsen's book is the fascinating dis- cussion of the perhaps-inherent ambiguity of Rodin's work and the difficulty of pinning down its meaning. In the Theore- tical Perspectives section in this issue I discuss the debate between Mark Roskill and Michael Baxandall about the useful- ness of an appeal to the artist's intentions in the analysis of cubism. Not the least interesting question raised by Elsen's account of The Gates ofHell is whether or not the same problems arise in the interpretation of Rodin's art. Here Elsen's discussion of how Rodin exhibited many individual works from The Gates of Hell is of special value [3].
REFERENCES
portions the 'distortions' produced by the acceleration of the observer could be confused with the 'free distortions' pro- duced by the artist. When we foresee constructions of this kind, we realize further the importance of introducing lucid and stringent procedures (and balanced judgments as to what should be done mechanically and what by eye) such as the procedures presented in Moose's article. These surely constitute invaluable contributions to the field.
Fernando R. Casas 22214 Meadowsweet Magnolia, TX 77355
U.S.A.
COMMENTS ON A RE- ASSESSMENT OF RODIN'S 'GATES
OF HELL'
In my Theoretical Perspectives section (Leonardo 19, 170-4, 1986) I confidently asserted that Rodin's Gates of Hell was "seemingly unfinished when he died". In the course of a helpful correspondence, Albert Elsen has argued with my inter-
pretation of Rosalind Krauss's account of Rodin's unfinished works [1]. Since Elsen has devoted a portion of his fruitful career to the study of Rodin and played an important role in the revival of interest in that sculptor's work, it would be rash for me to ignore his judgment. In his recent book 'The Gates of Hell' by Auguste Rodin he concludes: "to all intents and purposes The Gates of Hell were completed in terms of their form by May of 1900" [2].
Apart from this point of historical accuracy, what I would draw attention to in Elsen's book is the fascinating dis- cussion of the perhaps-inherent ambiguity of Rodin's work and the difficulty of pinning down its meaning. In the Theore- tical Perspectives section in this issue I discuss the debate between Mark Roskill and Michael Baxandall about the useful- ness of an appeal to the artist's intentions in the analysis of cubism. Not the least interesting question raised by Elsen's account of The Gates ofHell is whether or not the same problems arise in the interpretation of Rodin's art. Here Elsen's discussion of how Rodin exhibited many individual works from The Gates of Hell is of special value [3].
REFERENCES
1. See my review of Rosalind E. Krauss, "The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths", The Burlington Magazine CXXVII, 817 (1985).
2. Albert E. Elsen, 'The Gates of Hell' by Auguste Rodin (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1985) p. 210.
1. See my review of Rosalind E. Krauss, "The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths", The Burlington Magazine CXXVII, 817 (1985).
2. Albert E. Elsen, 'The Gates of Hell' by Auguste Rodin (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1985) p. 210.
1. See my review of Rosalind E. Krauss, "The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths", The Burlington Magazine CXXVII, 817 (1985).
2. Albert E. Elsen, 'The Gates of Hell' by Auguste Rodin (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1985) p. 210.
1. See my review of Rosalind E. Krauss, "The Originality of the Avant-Garde and Other Modernist Myths", The Burlington Magazine CXXVII, 817 (1985).
2. Albert E. Elsen, 'The Gates of Hell' by Auguste Rodin (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1985) p. 210.
3. For further discussion, see my review of Albert E. Elsen, "Rodin's Thinker' and the Dilemmas of Modern Public Sculpture", The Burlington Magazine (forthcoming).
David Carrier Department of Philosophy
Carnegie-Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213
U.S.A.
COMMENTS ON THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES
Since the completion of my book The Interpretation of Cubism with its chapter on Intentions, the most interesting new argument to emerge on that subject is the joint contribution of an anthropologist, Dan Sperber, and a linguistics specialist, Deirdre Wilson. In their book Relevance: Communication and Cognition (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Univ. Pr., 1986) they propose a basic distinction between informative and communicative intentions. If one applies this distinction to visual images one may say that, as the informative intention is reduced (representationally, as in the contrast David Carrier makes between Picasso in 1910 and Giorgione), what Baxandall calls intention "referred to pictures rather than painters" and taking the form of "the forward leaning look of things" (p. 42) may still serve as a communicative stimulus: as an utterance on the artist's part may also do, when-as distinct from a statement which is con- cretely about the work-it serves to convey the presence of an attitude or assumption. For Baxandall, I would say, the communicative intention in the case of Cubism is a second-order intention, still dependent as in earlier art on fulfilment of the first-order informative intention for its recognition to be effected. For me in contrast it is no longer that: it is independent, as it may well be in other non-verbal forms of communication and as it comes to be in Gertrude Stein's writings of 1909-12.
I am not sure that the comparison with Gertrude Stein provides an explanation (Carrier's term, Leonardo 19, No. 4, 1986) of a superior or independent sort. It simply provides insight; it is a means of characterization, like those we use in everyday life for people.
My understanding of the later passage of John Golding's that Carrier cites would be that the Cubists did not grasp in advance the consequences or further
3. For further discussion, see my review of Albert E. Elsen, "Rodin's Thinker' and the Dilemmas of Modern Public Sculpture", The Burlington Magazine (forthcoming).
David Carrier Department of Philosophy
Carnegie-Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213
U.S.A.
COMMENTS ON THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES
Since the completion of my book The Interpretation of Cubism with its chapter on Intentions, the most interesting new argument to emerge on that subject is the joint contribution of an anthropologist, Dan Sperber, and a linguistics specialist, Deirdre Wilson. In their book Relevance: Communication and Cognition (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Univ. Pr., 1986) they propose a basic distinction between informative and communicative intentions. If one applies this distinction to visual images one may say that, as the informative intention is reduced (representationally, as in the contrast David Carrier makes between Picasso in 1910 and Giorgione), what Baxandall calls intention "referred to pictures rather than painters" and taking the form of "the forward leaning look of things" (p. 42) may still serve as a communicative stimulus: as an utterance on the artist's part may also do, when-as distinct from a statement which is con- cretely about the work-it serves to convey the presence of an attitude or assumption. For Baxandall, I would say, the communicative intention in the case of Cubism is a second-order intention, still dependent as in earlier art on fulfilment of the first-order informative intention for its recognition to be effected. For me in contrast it is no longer that: it is independent, as it may well be in other non-verbal forms of communication and as it comes to be in Gertrude Stein's writings of 1909-12.
I am not sure that the comparison with Gertrude Stein provides an explanation (Carrier's term, Leonardo 19, No. 4, 1986) of a superior or independent sort. It simply provides insight; it is a means of characterization, like those we use in everyday life for people.
My understanding of the later passage of John Golding's that Carrier cites would be that the Cubists did not grasp in advance the consequences or further
3. For further discussion, see my review of Albert E. Elsen, "Rodin's Thinker' and the Dilemmas of Modern Public Sculpture", The Burlington Magazine (forthcoming).
David Carrier Department of Philosophy
Carnegie-Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213
U.S.A.
COMMENTS ON THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES
Since the completion of my book The Interpretation of Cubism with its chapter on Intentions, the most interesting new argument to emerge on that subject is the joint contribution of an anthropologist, Dan Sperber, and a linguistics specialist, Deirdre Wilson. In their book Relevance: Communication and Cognition (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Univ. Pr., 1986) they propose a basic distinction between informative and communicative intentions. If one applies this distinction to visual images one may say that, as the informative intention is reduced (representationally, as in the contrast David Carrier makes between Picasso in 1910 and Giorgione), what Baxandall calls intention "referred to pictures rather than painters" and taking the form of "the forward leaning look of things" (p. 42) may still serve as a communicative stimulus: as an utterance on the artist's part may also do, when-as distinct from a statement which is con- cretely about the work-it serves to convey the presence of an attitude or assumption. For Baxandall, I would say, the communicative intention in the case of Cubism is a second-order intention, still dependent as in earlier art on fulfilment of the first-order informative intention for its recognition to be effected. For me in contrast it is no longer that: it is independent, as it may well be in other non-verbal forms of communication and as it comes to be in Gertrude Stein's writings of 1909-12.
I am not sure that the comparison with Gertrude Stein provides an explanation (Carrier's term, Leonardo 19, No. 4, 1986) of a superior or independent sort. It simply provides insight; it is a means of characterization, like those we use in everyday life for people.
My understanding of the later passage of John Golding's that Carrier cites would be that the Cubists did not grasp in advance the consequences or further
3. For further discussion, see my review of Albert E. Elsen, "Rodin's Thinker' and the Dilemmas of Modern Public Sculpture", The Burlington Magazine (forthcoming).
David Carrier Department of Philosophy
Carnegie-Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA 15213
U.S.A.
COMMENTS ON THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES
Since the completion of my book The Interpretation of Cubism with its chapter on Intentions, the most interesting new argument to emerge on that subject is the joint contribution of an anthropologist, Dan Sperber, and a linguistics specialist, Deirdre Wilson. In their book Relevance: Communication and Cognition (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard Univ. Pr., 1986) they propose a basic distinction between informative and communicative intentions. If one applies this distinction to visual images one may say that, as the informative intention is reduced (representationally, as in the contrast David Carrier makes between Picasso in 1910 and Giorgione), what Baxandall calls intention "referred to pictures rather than painters" and taking the form of "the forward leaning look of things" (p. 42) may still serve as a communicative stimulus: as an utterance on the artist's part may also do, when-as distinct from a statement which is con- cretely about the work-it serves to convey the presence of an attitude or assumption. For Baxandall, I would say, the communicative intention in the case of Cubism is a second-order intention, still dependent as in earlier art on fulfilment of the first-order informative intention for its recognition to be effected. For me in contrast it is no longer that: it is independent, as it may well be in other non-verbal forms of communication and as it comes to be in Gertrude Stein's writings of 1909-12.
I am not sure that the comparison with Gertrude Stein provides an explanation (Carrier's term, Leonardo 19, No. 4, 1986) of a superior or independent sort. It simply provides insight; it is a means of characterization, like those we use in everyday life for people.
My understanding of the later passage of John Golding's that Carrier cites would be that the Cubists did not grasp in advance the consequences or further implications of what they were engaged in doing. They did not intellectualize as to the direction in which their work was moving; rather their approach was em- pirical. A more radical view of Cubism than Golding's, on this construction, or
implications of what they were engaged in doing. They did not intellectualize as to the direction in which their work was moving; rather their approach was em- pirical. A more radical view of Cubism than Golding's, on this construction, or
implications of what they were engaged in doing. They did not intellectualize as to the direction in which their work was moving; rather their approach was em- pirical. A more radical view of Cubism than Golding's, on this construction, or
implications of what they were engaged in doing. They did not intellectualize as to the direction in which their work was moving; rather their approach was em- pirical. A more radical view of Cubism than Golding's, on this construction, or
mine would be that of Roger Cranshaw ("Cubism 1910-12: The Limits of Dis- course", Art History 8, No. 4, 467-483 (Dec. 1985), who implies that Picasso's and Braque's work of those years is, in effect, not meant to be explained; rather, it represents an undermining from within of the very (art historical) concept of intention. The intention-emergent in practice, rather than present as a "thought" (Carrier's term) or fully articulated con- ception behind the works-was to render the attribution of intention in conven- tional ways impossible. I call this more radical than my view because as a characterization it is weighted in an anarchistic direction; and though Picasso may have been sympathetic to anarchism at the time, the "intentional data" that are available in no way seem to imply that the partnership with Braque was anarchistic in temper.
Mark Roskill Dept. of Art History
University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA
U.S.A.
COMMENTS ON "SPACE THROUGH COLOUR AND
ILLUSION"
Some general conclusions having to do with the artist's personality came to my mind when reading Opy Zouni's text (Leonardo 18, 96-99, 1985). Certain elements clearly are important in order correctly to situate her work in the context of art. Of greatest significance is the creator's process in the artistic act and the conditions on which that process depends. There is no doubt about the interrelation of these two elements. Her text gives the reader-spectator the chance to make her or his own observations in an informed way.
A first observation that directly comes out of the text is the way in which two elements operate in Opy Zouni's artistic work: the colour and the character of her work. Both have a direct relation with the observation of nature or observation in general.
The first element, colour, may be taken as the correlation of light and material that she is using in a given situation to clearly present the desired result to the spectator. The illusion of space, its false presentation-something that exists only for the eye and not in reality- plays an
mine would be that of Roger Cranshaw ("Cubism 1910-12: The Limits of Dis- course", Art History 8, No. 4, 467-483 (Dec. 1985), who implies that Picasso's and Braque's work of those years is, in effect, not meant to be explained; rather, it represents an undermining from within of the very (art historical) concept of intention. The intention-emergent in practice, rather than present as a "thought" (Carrier's term) or fully articulated con- ception behind the works-was to render the attribution of intention in conven- tional ways impossible. I call this more radical than my view because as a characterization it is weighted in an anarchistic direction; and though Picasso may have been sympathetic to anarchism at the time, the "intentional data" that are available in no way seem to imply that the partnership with Braque was anarchistic in temper.
Mark Roskill Dept. of Art History
University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA
U.S.A.
COMMENTS ON "SPACE THROUGH COLOUR AND
ILLUSION"
Some general conclusions having to do with the artist's personality came to my mind when reading Opy Zouni's text (Leonardo 18, 96-99, 1985). Certain elements clearly are important in order correctly to situate her work in the context of art. Of greatest significance is the creator's process in the artistic act and the conditions on which that process depends. There is no doubt about the interrelation of these two elements. Her text gives the reader-spectator the chance to make her or his own observations in an informed way.
A first observation that directly comes out of the text is the way in which two elements operate in Opy Zouni's artistic work: the colour and the character of her work. Both have a direct relation with the observation of nature or observation in general.
The first element, colour, may be taken as the correlation of light and material that she is using in a given situation to clearly present the desired result to the spectator. The illusion of space, its false presentation-something that exists only for the eye and not in reality- plays an
mine would be that of Roger Cranshaw ("Cubism 1910-12: The Limits of Dis- course", Art History 8, No. 4, 467-483 (Dec. 1985), who implies that Picasso's and Braque's work of those years is, in effect, not meant to be explained; rather, it represents an undermining from within of the very (art historical) concept of intention. The intention-emergent in practice, rather than present as a "thought" (Carrier's term) or fully articulated con- ception behind the works-was to render the attribution of intention in conven- tional ways impossible. I call this more radical than my view because as a characterization it is weighted in an anarchistic direction; and though Picasso may have been sympathetic to anarchism at the time, the "intentional data" that are available in no way seem to imply that the partnership with Braque was anarchistic in temper.
Mark Roskill Dept. of Art History
University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA
U.S.A.
COMMENTS ON "SPACE THROUGH COLOUR AND
ILLUSION"
Some general conclusions having to do with the artist's personality came to my mind when reading Opy Zouni's text (Leonardo 18, 96-99, 1985). Certain elements clearly are important in order correctly to situate her work in the context of art. Of greatest significance is the creator's process in the artistic act and the conditions on which that process depends. There is no doubt about the interrelation of these two elements. Her text gives the reader-spectator the chance to make her or his own observations in an informed way.
A first observation that directly comes out of the text is the way in which two elements operate in Opy Zouni's artistic work: the colour and the character of her work. Both have a direct relation with the observation of nature or observation in general.
The first element, colour, may be taken as the correlation of light and material that she is using in a given situation to clearly present the desired result to the spectator. The illusion of space, its false presentation-something that exists only for the eye and not in reality- plays an
mine would be that of Roger Cranshaw ("Cubism 1910-12: The Limits of Dis- course", Art History 8, No. 4, 467-483 (Dec. 1985), who implies that Picasso's and Braque's work of those years is, in effect, not meant to be explained; rather, it represents an undermining from within of the very (art historical) concept of intention. The intention-emergent in practice, rather than present as a "thought" (Carrier's term) or fully articulated con- ception behind the works-was to render the attribution of intention in conven- tional ways impossible. I call this more radical than my view because as a characterization it is weighted in an anarchistic direction; and though Picasso may have been sympathetic to anarchism at the time, the "intentional data" that are available in no way seem to imply that the partnership with Braque was anarchistic in temper.
Mark Roskill Dept. of Art History
University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA
U.S.A.
COMMENTS ON "SPACE THROUGH COLOUR AND
ILLUSION"
Some general conclusions having to do with the artist's personality came to my mind when reading Opy Zouni's text (Leonardo 18, 96-99, 1985). Certain elements clearly are important in order correctly to situate her work in the context of art. Of greatest significance is the creator's process in the artistic act and the conditions on which that process depends. There is no doubt about the interrelation of these two elements. Her text gives the reader-spectator the chance to make her or his own observations in an informed way.
A first observation that directly comes out of the text is the way in which two elements operate in Opy Zouni's artistic work: the colour and the character of her work. Both have a direct relation with the observation of nature or observation in general.
The first element, colour, may be taken as the correlation of light and material that she is using in a given situation to clearly present the desired result to the spectator. The illusion of space, its false presentation-something that exists only for the eye and not in reality- plays an important role in the final artistic creation.
Light as well as material, as artistic values in her work, have a sentimental character, an emotional existence. At the same time, illusion, which I consider a sentimental element, becomes the bridge
important role in the final artistic creation. Light as well as material, as artistic
values in her work, have a sentimental character, an emotional existence. At the same time, illusion, which I consider a sentimental element, becomes the bridge
important role in the final artistic creation. Light as well as material, as artistic
values in her work, have a sentimental character, an emotional existence. At the same time, illusion, which I consider a sentimental element, becomes the bridge
important role in the final artistic creation. Light as well as material, as artistic
values in her work, have a sentimental character, an emotional existence. At the same time, illusion, which I consider a sentimental element, becomes the bridge
Letters Letters Letters Letters 359 359 359 359
This content downloaded from 195.78.109.49 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 01:28:23 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
