Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Interart Studies and the "Imperialism" of Language

Bibliographic Data

ID4375685
AuthorsErnest B Gilman (corresponding author)
Year1989
Volume10
Issue1
Pages5
Publication date1989-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePoetics Today (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0333-5372 • E-ISSN: 1527-5507
PublisherJSTOR (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.2307/1772553
OpenAlexW2330819112
LanguageEN
Citations received8
References cited5

Speaking Pictures? At a recent professional forum on possibility of an art(s) discourse for 1980s, one prominent art historian suggested criticism of visual arts had, if anything, already too much to do with discourse. Why is it, he asked, that art history has resisted, more than study of other, non-visual arts, most evident in literary criticism? (Kuspit 1986: 1). The virtue of resistance is implied in question, for behind peaceful overtures of new interdisciplinarianism lurk the colonizing, consumerist tendencies of English Studies, eagerly reducing art to text, visual art into linguistic art, vision into sign, in effect arguing case for Derrida's [1973] assertion 'the collusion between painting ... and is constant' -if not for an even more insidious Derridean attempt to bury painting in writing, or to suggest painting is bad writing (Kuspit 1986: 3). The new interdisciplinarianism turns out to be a imperialism in disguise, and-as was to a large extent also true of old imperialism-its weapon for colonizing, reducing, and ultimately burying natives of visual realm is language. Insofar as speaker's views represent a current position among art historians, those of us in English studies may find in them a curious replay of battle over theory in our own camp, now staged as a contest for dominion between two disciplines. In fact, paragone between arts, here reflected in turf disputes of their academic exponents, is a venerable topos. As W. J. T. Mitchell (1986: 43)

Linguistics · Financial Crisis of the 21st Century · History · Philosophy

  • Los límites de la letra

    Open Access•Luis Henao Uribe•Nexus•2016

  • What Scene, What’s Seen, What’s in A… Word

    Open Access•Edyta Frelik•Discourses on Culture•2023

  • Emblematics and metaphor

    Open Access•Daniele Borgogni•Frontiers in Communication•2023

  • Devant l’image. « L’absente de tout bouquet »

    Liliane Louvel•Polysèmes•2021

  • The gallery, the eye, and the rhetoric of observation in some seventeenth-century descriptions

    Claire Preston•The Seventeenth Century•2017

  • Correspondencias, confidencias y contrapuntos

    Open Access•Candelas Gala•Bulletin Hispanique•2014

  • Bruegel's parody of an Ovidian myth in Landschap, met Icarus' val

    Clive Cornew•de arte•1995

  • Memory and Historicism

    Maiken Umbach•Representations•2004

  • The demise of ‘and’

    Open Access•Marjorie Perloff•Critical Quarterly•1990

  • Iconoclasm and Poetry in the English Reformation

    Ernest B Gilman, Douglas H Parker•Renaissance and Reformation•1969

  • Desire and the Interpretation of Desire in Hamlet

    Jacques Lacan, Jacques-Alain Miller et al.•Yale French Studies•1977

  • Ut Pictura Noesis? Criticism in Literary Studies and Art History

    Svetlana Alper, Svetlana Alpers et al.•New Literary History•1972

  • Ideology and Iconology

    Giulio Carlo Argan, Rebecca West•Critical Inquiry•1975

Unique citing works8
Citations per year0,26
Citation span1995 - 2023 (29)
Citation velocityhistorical
Highly citedNo
Citation typesNeutral: 7

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae