What is it, exactly, that art historians do? Is it our task to interpret art, help preserve it, or constitute a cultural canon? Should we participate in the display or marketing of art? Write art criticism for our peers or the general public? And how should we do it? Should we reconstruct the aims of the artist or examine art from our own historical moment? What happens if we emphasize one of the following: artistic technique and form, subject matter, the artist’s biography, patronage, or the critical/intellectual debates of a period? Do feminism and gender studies have anything to contribute? What about theories of perception, the study of viewer response, psychology, marxism, etc.? We often talk about context, but what does this include? Can we take the terms “artist,” “work of art,” and “art historian” for granted?

This course will consider a broad range of art historical methods through weekly readings. Requirements include active participation in discussion, a series of critical responses to the readings, and several short creative assignments exploring specific methods.