The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 19.0475 Friday, 15 August 2008
From: David Evett <
Date: Thursday, 14 Aug 2008 12:52:45 -0400
Subject: 19.0462 Intentions Reactions
Comment: Re: SHK 19.0462 Intentions Reactions
>Arnold Hauser classifies him convincingly as a Mannerist; others
>say he has no mannerisms. So there is quite a lot to sort out.
Felix de Villiers should understand that Mannerism, as an art historical term
designating (a) a group of 16th- and early 17th-century painters, sculptors, and
architects that included Michelangelo and El Greco, among many others or, as
Hauser proposes, (b) a recurrent way of making art that also has 19th- and 20th-
and presumably 21st-century practioners, as Hauser proposes, is not a matter of
having mannerisms. Some, maybe most artists have distinctive ways of doing
things -- mannerisms, if you will -- that among other things help the critic or
appraiser or historian to identify a work as Pontormo's or Francis Bacon's even
without the signature and authenticated provenance. The term began as an
observation that in the work of some artists, the manner -- what de Villiers
presumably means by Style -- seems to become an object in itself rather than a
means for presenting or representing some subject. The topic would hence belong
very comfortably in the discussion de Villiers proposes. The real usefulness of
the style-content dichotomy is pretty widely challenged in post-modern theory,
of course; but that could be one of the threads of the conversation.
Hauser's is hardly the last word on the topic, by the way.
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook,
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the opinions
expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the editor assumes no
responsibility for them.