Some Fundamental Issues in the History of Chinese Painting
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 3409563 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Max Loehr (Harvard University Press, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1964 |
| Volume | 23 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 185-193 |
| Publication date | 1964-02-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The Journal of Asian Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0021-9118 • E-ISSN: 1752-0401 |
| Publisher | Duke University Press (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.2307/2050131 |
| OpenAlex | W2137173071 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 2 |
The history of Chinese painting is a relatively new discipline. None of us who work in that discipline can as yet rely on a binding tradition, accepted methods, or even on established facts of historical significance. It is possible for several critics to arrive at surprisingly contradictory judgments about one and the same work, or sequence of works, or about the meaning of the same evidence. Our judgments, naturally, will change; the work adjudged will not. We have to come to terms with it in the end. Coming to terms, however, does not mean a compromise between opposed views or viewers. It means that the right understanding of the work or sequence in question will sooner or later prevail-that is, the right understanding of the work as a historical monument. But how is this understanding achieved? It is this seemingly simple question, the basic problem facing the historian, that I shall discuss
Aesthetics · Art · Art history · Compromise · Epistemology · Meaning (existential) · Painting · Sequence (biology) · Simple (philosophy) · Social science · Sociology · Visual arts · Work (physics) · Chinese history and philosophy · Engineering · History · Philosophy
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,08 |
| Citation span | 1977 - 2001 (25) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |