Art History And Its Methods: Critical Analysis

Bethany Thomas
16 January 2014
Critical Response Essay #1
Morelli, Giovanni. Exerpts from “Principles and Method”, in Italian Painters: Critical Studies of their Work, 1890: Preface written in 1889, translated by C.J. Ffoulkes, London, 1892. Fernie, Eric. Art History and Its Methods: A critical Anthology, Phaidon. 1995.
Berenson, Bernard. “Rudiments of Connoisseurship.” In The Study and Criticism of Italian Art,. London: G. Bell and Sons, LTD., 1931.

Throughout the Morelli reading, we are shown that education is the combination of classroom material as well as practical interaction. The basis of the Morelli article was to show the difference between being a connoisseur of art, or someone who takes art in and appreciates it aesthetically, and being an actual art historian practicing in the field. The concept that differentiates between these two ways of looking at art is that when one is an art historian, he or she examines every aspect and factor that is responsible in the making of the work of art. This means that an art historian will focus more on the methodology of how and/or why the piece exists from the basis of theories such as an artist’s biography, the cultural history surrounding the piece, or others such as the psychological analysis of the artist or the influence of social movements such as Marxism or feminism. This typically requires a more in depth analysis than that of a connoisseur, and one based on more textual research. A connoisseur examines the art itself in the physical aspect: the techniques, brushstroke, texture, form, composition, etc. Throughout this article, one may find most fascinating the aspect that in looking at in varying perspectives such as both a connoisseur and as an art historian is a ben...

... middle of paper ...

...in art history thus far.
When reading the Berenson article, one would find a major attention to detail of critically researching documents such as paying attention to concrete scientific analysis in authenticating signatures, contracts, etc. However, something that the reader may find “missing” was the same attention to detail in artistic approaches such as form, composition, brushstrokes, and texture—the opposite of the Morelli argument. Berenson uses more scientific methodology leads to a more critical understanding and aids in validation from more than one spectrum. Berenson shows the reader that this must be found in multiple sources, and no matter how significant one document or detail maybe, it alone cannot establish authenticity. Therefore, it is important to not ignore even the smallest or seemingly pointless detail, for that may be where the proof lies.