Open AccessModes of Making Art History
Author(s) -
Maria Bremer
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
stedelijk studies
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2405-7177
DOI - 10.54533/stedstud.vol002.art08
Subject(s) - exhibition , compendium , history of art , neutrality , contemporary art , visual arts , selection (genetic algorithm) , art , art history , history , computer science , epistemology , philosophy , performance art , archaeology , artificial intelligence , architecture
As art history further questions its fundamentals, the exhibition format continues to lose its neutrality. In the preface to the second volume of his compendium, Biennials and Beyond – Exhibitions that made art history: 1962–2002, Bruce Altshuler leads the increasing interest by art historians for exhibitions back to the insight that “exhibitions bring together a range of characters, who, exercising varied intentions in diverse circumstances, generate so much of what comes down to us as art history.”[1] However, the academic rewriting of selected shows is itself subjected to norms which, given their canonizing effects, must be taken into consideration. This article does not intend to question the art historical study of exhibitions tout court. Rather, it criticizes the selection of case studies according to a logic of masterpieces while excluding exhibitions which are regarded as not having made art history. In fact, the different modes by which exhibitions can shape art history require further analysis, eventually casting new light on events which have not hitherto entered the canon of relevant shows.