I think it's insulting to be called a "school boy" at age 72, after more than 40 years of productive work in academia during which I headed art departments for more than 25 years, including art history curricula, and having served on hiring, promotion and tenure committees for art scholars nationally, and after having studied art history fairly thoroughly at the University of Chicago and having published art historical commentary.
I know the methodology of art historical research but I'm not going to do it now because I am so deeply engaged with a studio practice and can hear the clock ticking. Serious research is daunting and time-consuming. Generally, I do provide published sources for my own comments. Mr. Miller can do his own homework. Wickipedia is ok, I suppose, for finding generalized topics, and a few contributed scholarly summaries, bibliographies, etc., but it can't serve as a reliable source for serious scholarship. I have seen egregious errors in Wickipedia and I know of no academic institution where it is accepted as a citation for any academic work, even at the undergraduate level. The school boy here is Miller and he's not done any homework, I do enjoy many of Miller's contributions here, often his questions, rhetorical though they may be, and his odd take on many issues. Yet, I am annoyed when he seeks to cut down those who offer information he can't understand or take the trouble to investigate. WC ________________________________ From: Chris Miller <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2009 8:12:50 AM Subject: Re: Judging the late Titian Other than personally attacking me and flattering William, what have you contributed to this topic, Michael ? And, might you point to any phrase on this thread where I have "impugned the integrity both of the scholarship and the moral character of scholars, curators, artists, and others who work in the different institutions of art" ? I've only gone after "the school boys" -- i.e. those who, rather than share their own experience or introduce us to specific scholars, just present a supposed consensus of scholarly opinion. (as William does when he writes "I for one am able to assess the scholarship, the evidence, re Titian. I am not going to take the time to do it".) We might as well just skip any discussion, and go directly to Wikipedia (which really is compiled by school boys) where we can read the following: "Athough his mature works may not contain the vivid, luminous tints of his early pieces, their loose brushwork and subtlety of polychromatic modulations are without precedent in the history of Western art." ************* In this discussion of Titian, and in many others, Miller specifically speaks out, not by offering an informed opposition to William's statements, but by impugning the integrity both of the scholarship and the moral character of scholars, curators, artists, and others who work in the different institutions of art--and personally of William. They are the kept souls, pawns or dupes or active participants with the vile forces of crass commerce and self-congratulating power. He claims that he can educate himself (how? from whom? from what sources?) and hone his aesthetic awareness, taste, and ultimately judgment independently of the mainline art world. But this is merely a misdirection, intended to take our attention off his main purpose, maligning art historians, critics, curators, and even artists. When William writes on any art topic--and on most cultural topics--he writes with knowledge of current and historical facts, and he writes with clarity and evident familiarity and understanding of the topics. His messages are always worth paying attention to. It's a mark of true humility for an intelligent listener to acknowledge the cogency of his comments. That doesn't mean that everyone must agree with William, but everyone should respond with an equal appreciation for the facts, for the logic of arguments, for reasonable clarity of expression. Miller doesn't do that. Instead, he claims the supremacy of autonomous experience. BFD. Everyone has experiences. When it comes to the topic at hand, he announced "Before launching an attack on Titian's late work" and then, after a few left-handed dismissals of the paintings, proceeds to say "We [William and he] just have a different idea as to what qualifies as 'most informed' [about aesthetic judgment].'" In other words, it doesn't matter what others who have taken a long career studying Titian have to say, when he has an opinion, too. And besides, art scholars aren't to be trusted. This isn't a matter of some outsider or naif offering some unexpected insight, of some nonexpert speaking out of turn, or of a professor taking umbrage at others who "reverence their own opinion more than they do his." (That's beneath you.) It's a matter of conducting our discussions with more respect and intelligence than Miller bothers with. ____________________________________________________________ Let great B to B marketing solutions propel your brand to new heights! Click now! http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/BLSrjnxX0BRN2PaENk9D3AiwA8HYk1 NgT79mikrTw4zLZ75qrZ8HEyGyJ9G/
