Placeholder Image

Subtitles section Play video

  • [THEME MUSIC]

  • Art history can be deadly.

  • If it's happened to you, you know what I'm talking about--

  • a dark room, an endless succession

  • of flat images on a screen, names, and dates,

  • and movements, and napping.

  • If you've had a great art history class, I'm so glad.

  • And if you've had a single art history class,

  • well, it's maybe better than none.

  • I'm thinking about this because I've

  • been watching the new series "Civilizations," which

  • takes a wide view in talking about the beginnings

  • of human creativity and its development

  • in many different parts of the world.

  • It's a follow-up to a series the BBC aired in 1969

  • called "Civilization," singular, where art historian Kenneth

  • Clark outlined a personal and very Eurocentric account of,

  • quote, "the great works of Western man."

  • He wasn't telling the history of art per se, but what he called,

  • quote, "all the life giving human activities we

  • lump under the term civilization."

  • Barbarism was, in his view, the opposite

  • of civilization and nearly wiped out civilization entirely.

  • But he does clarify that great works of art

  • can be produced in barbarous society.

  • Now, this is problematic from a number of angles

  • and was even old-fashioned at the time.

  • But people loved it, in Europe and in the US.

  • They felt empowered to understand cultural history,

  • had watching parties, and bought the book.

  • Afterward, there was even an uptick in cultural tourism.

  • 50 years later come "Civilizations,"

  • in which three art historians attempt

  • a much more global history of human artistic production,

  • starting with the first human marks

  • we've discovered in caves, and skipping around the world,

  • through history and up to today.

  • It's a lot to cover.

  • But rather than promoting an understanding

  • of "civilization" fighting to hold barbarians at bay,

  • the new series emphasizes how cultures around the world

  • have influenced each other, constantly

  • evolving, and borrowing, and exchanging ideas.

  • They added extra "s" to the Renaissance

  • as well, telling us of the flourishing of art

  • in areas other than Italy.

  • We're told of Rembrandt's interest in Mughal art

  • and its impact on his work stemming

  • from the Dutch East India Company's

  • trade between the Netherlands and India.

  • There is a tendency in art history

  • to tell the story of influence moving in one direction.

  • But here, we see the tides flowing both ways,

  • weaving a much more complicated tale.

  • This shift from civilization to civilizations

  • reflects a wider transformation in the way art history

  • and history in general is taught.

  • Now you can take classes not only about art history,

  • but classes about how we teach art history,

  • or methodology, a word I hoped I'd never say publicly.

  • These days, there's a wider acceptance

  • that any one topic can be approached

  • from a variety of directions.

  • Like you can look at a work of art

  • formally, analyzing only what you can see--

  • color, line, composition, et cetera.

  • You can read a work iconographically,

  • recognizing the symbols it might contain

  • and what those symbols meant when the work was created.

  • You can take a biographical approach,

  • researching the story and intentions of the person

  • or people who made it.

  • Or you can use a whole swath of what

  • are called critical theories to better understand your subject,

  • like psychoanalytic theories seeking out the subconscious

  • drives that might be at play in a work

  • or Marxist theory looking at the economic and social conditions

  • that inform the work.

  • Postcolonial theory, you'll be surprised to learn,

  • seeks to understand a work through the colonial

  • or imperial forces that might have shaped it.

  • The new "Civilizations" doesn't shy away from these readings,

  • pointing out European artists' interest in Islamic culture

  • as a source of the exotic, often concocting scenes and history

  • as whole cloth, fantasies, propagating stereotypes

  • rather than reflecting anything based in reality.

  • We can also look at the ways race, gender, and sexualities

  • have and have not been represented in art

  • and how whole categories of people

  • have been excluded from our history books

  • or were prevented from making work and showing it

  • in the first place.

  • These are just a few of the many lenses

  • you can use to look at art deploying one or many of them

  • to inform your understanding of a thing.

  • Not to complicate the matter further,

  • but what even is art to begin with?

  • You'll note "Civilizations" sidesteps the question

  • by using their amorphous but now more inclusive term.

  • There is art, anthropology, architecture, design,

  • visual culture, material culture, thing theory.

  • We use these terms to talk about all

  • of the stuff, and environments, and experiences

  • that humans have made, understanding that none of them

  • is sufficient on its own.

  • But for all of the nuance we've added to the study of art

  • at the upper levels, very little has changed

  • in our introductions to art.

  • What's most often communicated is a linear narrative

  • of cultures and movements, at least

  • in America, focusing on the, yes,

  • significant contributions of ancient Greece and Rome,

  • the Italian Renaissance, perhaps touching

  • on a few non-Western parts of the world.

  • In general, we're told a story of advancement and progress

  • from one school of art to the next.

  • Impressionism, to Neo-Impressionism,

  • to Post-Impressionism-- ism begetting ism,

  • as if the creation of art is a single timeline rather than

  • a vast confusing web.

  • The art of the last 50 years and of today

  • is either left out or smushed into the final 15

  • minutes of the last class.

  • Complication and nuance are reserved

  • for higher-level courses where, if you get there,

  • you'll steadily pick apart the narrative you were originally

  • presented within your introduction.

  • The more linear version of history you first learn

  • may have been easier to memorize and promptly forget.

  • But it recklessly sacrifices so much

  • in its efforts to simplify and smooth over.

  • It also tends to gloss over the important factor of you

  • in the story of art and use of the past.

  • By this I mean how artworks have been interpreted historically

  • and in the present, and the biases inevitable in whomever

  • is telling the story.

  • Kenneth Clark's "Civilization" was flawed, for sure.

  • But he was very effective in sharing

  • with others what it is he loved about art, and architecture,

  • and philosophy.

  • Just a few years later, one of my personal heroes,

  • John Berger, came out with a BBC series of his own

  • called "Ways of Seeing," which he also adapted into a book.

  • Rather than attempt any sort of overview of art,

  • he sought instead to teach us how

  • to look at things in the world in a critical

  • but altogether regulatory way.

  • Seek it out and watch it.

  • I have chosen to teach art history

  • through this show in my own particular and flawed way.

  • It's inefficient and scattershot,

  • jumping around in time and space,

  • bringing up stories of art from the past

  • as they relate to the present.

  • I privilege the things I happened

  • to learn about in my American schools and career.

  • I use the term art in a broad way,

  • trying not to give it boundaries, but instead let

  • it be a shapeless, nebulous catch-all.

  • Every way we talk about art, or whatever you want to call it,

  • is flawed, and incomplete, and biased.

  • But it's a matter of which flawed, and incomplete,

  • and biased way or ways we pay attention to.

  • I would argue that you don't like art history

  • because the stories you learn usually

  • don't bear any resemblance to the world

  • as you experience it, which is messy, and complicated,

  • and hard to make sense of.

  • With hindsight, we're able to craft totalizing narratives

  • which are helpful when the AP College Board tries to test

  • your mastery of a subject.

  • But those narratives are ultimately

  • unhelpful in getting you to like art, in teaching you how to see

  • and how to be a critical thinker.

  • Maybe the goal is to absorb as many

  • of the flawed, incomplete, and biased histories as we can,

  • appreciating what is there, what's missing,

  • and who's telling it, and to let ourselves live

  • with a chaotic, asynchronous story of art,

  • allowing for diversity, and difference, and change, which

  • is ultimately a more accurate and more compelling

  • representation of the fullness of the world.

  • If you're interested in absorbing

  • a tremendous amount of art, and architecture, and history,

  • you should check out "Civilizations," the new series

  • produced by PBS and the BBC that tells the story of art

  • from the dawn of human history to the present day.

  • It's a rigorous, and thoughtful, and mind-expanding look

  • at how art and creativity helped forge our societies

  • and cultures.

  • Click the links in the description below

  • to find out more.

  • Many thanks to Indianapolis Homes Realty and all

  • of our patrons for supporting the Art Assignment.

  • If you like our show, subscribe.

  • And if you'd like to support our show,

  • head over to patreon.com/artassignment.

  • [MUSIC PLAYING]

[THEME MUSIC]

Subtitles and vocabulary

Click the word to look it up Click the word to find further inforamtion about it