Before coming to this seminar I thought I had a general idea of what the differences were between subjects such as anthropology and sociology. However, after that class I realized I could not give you a clear answer on what the distinctions are between these studies. After looking it up, I got that anthropology is “the study of human societies and cultures and their development,” and sociology is, “the study of the development, structure, and functioning of human society.” Even in their definitions they’re pretty similar, so I guess the confusion was justified. This book has made me realize that although there are these different fields of study, many are interdisciplinary and cross paths in a lot of different ways with each other.
Look Again! Chapters 4-6
I found chapter 5 the most interesting of these chapters. I had never heard of hermeneutics before. Hermeneutics focuses on the theory and practice of interpretation. Modern hermeneutics includes both verbal and non-verbal communication, as well as semiotics, presuppositions, and pre-understandings. Hermeneutics has been broadly applied in the humanities, especially in law, history and theology. This concept goes back to semiotics and focuses on Peirce’s construction of the sign.
The idea that the viewer completes a work of art can be attributed to hermeneutics. This is important in art theory. The practice of displaying art and having viewers interpret it completes the piece. Art is a process rather than an object. Art historians who engage with hermeneutic theory shift their attention away from iconography and towards the experience of the work of art. The relationship between the viewer and the art helps us interpret an object.
Look! Again chapters 4-6
Chapters four through six of Look! Again by D’Alleva presented theories that were at times perplexing but always thought provoking. Each of the theories questioned either the interplay of works of art with context or the viewer. Psychoanalysis, The Psychology of Art, Reader Response Theory, the Aesthetics of Reception, and Hermeneutics all analyze how a viewer interprets a piece of art, considering the context of the viewing, and pre-understandings of the viewer. Psychoanalysis also attempts to theorize how an artist made a piece of art and makes claims stating that the artist is not in control of the piece but is just releasing unconscious energy through imagery. Hermeneutics argued that the interpretation of art also changes depending on the time and place of interpretation and that the act of interpretation is a circle, where one enters in the middle due to preconceptions.
Reader-response theory was one theory that especially captured my attention because I finally began to understand why my older sister is a comparative literature major. I’ve never been fond of analyzing text, and so I couldn’t appreciate what she was doing as a comparative lit major, nor why it intrigued her. Reader response theory states that a text or work of art does not have pre-given meaning, meaning happens through reading or viewing. By learning about reader-response theory and how it can be applied to artwork, I learned that what I find so interesting in art history is not so different from what she finds appealing in comparative literature. Reader-response theory also made me question if or how often theory is used in her discipline.