What do you think?
Rate this book
The Social History of Art #1
The Social History of Art, Volume 1: From Prehistoric Times to the Middle Ages
Volume 1 of this comprehensive social history of art takes the reader from prehistoric naturalism, art and magic, through the art of the orient, ancient Greece and Rome to the high art of the European middle ages.
360 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1951
86 people are currently reading
1732 people want to read
About the author
Arnold Hauser
165 books70 followersArnold Hauser was born in Temesvar (now Timisoara, Romania), to a family of assimilated Jews. He studied history of art and literature at the universities of Budapest, Vienna, Berlin, and Paris. In Paris his teacher was Henri Bergson who influenced him deeply. To earn extra income he reported on art, literature and cultural events for the Temesvári Hírlap (Temesvár News). For a period he was a teacher at a Budapest Gymnasium.
In 1916 Hauser became a member of the Budapest Sunday Circle, which was formed around the critic and philosopher György Lukács. The group included Karl Mannheim, a sociologist, the writers Béla Balázs, and the musicians Béla Bartók and Zoltán Kodály. Mannheim, who had at first rejected the idea that sociology could be useful in the understanding of thought, soon became convinced of its utility. Also Frigyes Antal (1887-1954) applied the sociological method to art.
After World War I Hauser spent with his bride two years in Italy doing research work on the history of classical and Italian art and earned his Ph.D. in Budapest. His dissertation dealt with the problem of aesthetic systematization. In 1921 he moved to Berlin. By that time he had developed his view that the problems of art and literature are fundamentally sociological problems. Three years later, when his wife declared that she wanted to live closer to Hungary, the couple settled down in Vienna, where Hauser supported himself as a freelance writer and as publicity agent for of a film company. He also worked on an unfinished book, entitled Dramaturgie und Soziologie des Films. Later he said, that "For me this was the period of collecting data and experiences which I used much later in the course of my writing my works on the sociology of art."
Fleeing the Nazis after the Anschluss in Austria, Hauser and his wife emigrated in 1938 to Great Britain. Shortly upon their arrival, his wife died of influenza. Alone and without any regular income, Hauser then began to research for Social History of Art. It took ten years to finish the Marxist survey, his magnum opus of more than a thiusand pages, which appeared when he was 59. Still following what is going on in the film world, Hauser also wrote a number of essays about films for Life and Letters Today and Sight and Sound. From 1951 he was a lecturer on the history of art at the University of Leeds, and in the late 1950s a visiting professor at Brandeis University in the United States. In 1959 he became a teacher at Hornsey College of Art in London. He worked again in the United States in 1963-65 and then returned to London.
When Hungarian Radio aired a Budapest-London conversation between Hauser and Lukács in July 1969, Hauser confessed: "I am not an orthodox Marxist. My life is devoted to scholarship, not politics. My task, I feel, is not political." In 1977 Hauser moved to Hungary, where he became an honorary member of the Academy of Science. He died in Budapest on January 28, 1978, at the age of 86.
Hauser's last book, Soziologie der Kunst (1974, Sociology of Art), which he wrote racing against time and declining health, investigated the social and economic determinants of art. In this pessimistic work he distanced himself from Marxism and historical determinism. "The foreseeable future," he said, "lies in the shadow of the atom bomb, of political dictatorship, of unbridled violence and cynical nihilism. Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin left, as a permanent testament, a feeling of fear and apprehension which cannot be mastered." Hauser's suggestion that art does not merely reflect but interacts with society is a widely accepted premise. He also saw the art establishment and art reviewers as servers of commercial interests. As in his Social History of Art, Hauser's approach was Euro-centered and did not pay much attention to non-Western art.
Social History of Art was the result of thirty years of scholarly labour. It traced the production of art from Lascaux to the Film Age
In 1916 Hauser became a member of the Budapest Sunday Circle, which was formed around the critic and philosopher György Lukács. The group included Karl Mannheim, a sociologist, the writers Béla Balázs, and the musicians Béla Bartók and Zoltán Kodály. Mannheim, who had at first rejected the idea that sociology could be useful in the understanding of thought, soon became convinced of its utility. Also Frigyes Antal (1887-1954) applied the sociological method to art.
After World War I Hauser spent with his bride two years in Italy doing research work on the history of classical and Italian art and earned his Ph.D. in Budapest. His dissertation dealt with the problem of aesthetic systematization. In 1921 he moved to Berlin. By that time he had developed his view that the problems of art and literature are fundamentally sociological problems. Three years later, when his wife declared that she wanted to live closer to Hungary, the couple settled down in Vienna, where Hauser supported himself as a freelance writer and as publicity agent for of a film company. He also worked on an unfinished book, entitled Dramaturgie und Soziologie des Films. Later he said, that "For me this was the period of collecting data and experiences which I used much later in the course of my writing my works on the sociology of art."
Fleeing the Nazis after the Anschluss in Austria, Hauser and his wife emigrated in 1938 to Great Britain. Shortly upon their arrival, his wife died of influenza. Alone and without any regular income, Hauser then began to research for Social History of Art. It took ten years to finish the Marxist survey, his magnum opus of more than a thiusand pages, which appeared when he was 59. Still following what is going on in the film world, Hauser also wrote a number of essays about films for Life and Letters Today and Sight and Sound. From 1951 he was a lecturer on the history of art at the University of Leeds, and in the late 1950s a visiting professor at Brandeis University in the United States. In 1959 he became a teacher at Hornsey College of Art in London. He worked again in the United States in 1963-65 and then returned to London.
When Hungarian Radio aired a Budapest-London conversation between Hauser and Lukács in July 1969, Hauser confessed: "I am not an orthodox Marxist. My life is devoted to scholarship, not politics. My task, I feel, is not political." In 1977 Hauser moved to Hungary, where he became an honorary member of the Academy of Science. He died in Budapest on January 28, 1978, at the age of 86.
Hauser's last book, Soziologie der Kunst (1974, Sociology of Art), which he wrote racing against time and declining health, investigated the social and economic determinants of art. In this pessimistic work he distanced himself from Marxism and historical determinism. "The foreseeable future," he said, "lies in the shadow of the atom bomb, of political dictatorship, of unbridled violence and cynical nihilism. Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin left, as a permanent testament, a feeling of fear and apprehension which cannot be mastered." Hauser's suggestion that art does not merely reflect but interacts with society is a widely accepted premise. He also saw the art establishment and art reviewers as servers of commercial interests. As in his Social History of Art, Hauser's approach was Euro-centered and did not pay much attention to non-Western art.
Social History of Art was the result of thirty years of scholarly labour. It traced the production of art from Lascaux to the Film Age
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
January 19, 2011
Marcel Duchamp said that all works of art die within about 50 years of their production... essentially because the world has moved on and they cease to be contemporaneous. They become fossils. I remember hearing a famous art historian talking about Della Francesca's "Baptism of Christ" (that fabulous piece of work now in the National Gallery that so few people understand). He said that within a few years of its production it was put away in a back room with a cloth over it - it had ceased to function. THAT'S the point! Works of art FUNCTION!
Hauser's "Social History Series" is a magnificent wake-up call to all those art-pseuds out there who think that looking at art is some sort of masturbatory process where all you get out of it is what you put in. Art isn't some safe pet sitting there quietly waiting for you to stroke it and admire it - it is a beast. It bites. It is the visual equivalent of a book. It holds ideas and worldviews! It is shouting at you. The trouble is that art is also the product of a particular time and place. To understand it we have to understand the mind of its creators - their language. It isn't for the faint-hearted or the intellectually lazy - you have to learn the language!
Hauser helps us on that road of getting into the minds and worldviews of those dead societies... we become archaeologists of art, reconstructing the pieces so that these works can speak.
Hauser's "Social History Series" is a magnificent wake-up call to all those art-pseuds out there who think that looking at art is some sort of masturbatory process where all you get out of it is what you put in. Art isn't some safe pet sitting there quietly waiting for you to stroke it and admire it - it is a beast. It bites. It is the visual equivalent of a book. It holds ideas and worldviews! It is shouting at you. The trouble is that art is also the product of a particular time and place. To understand it we have to understand the mind of its creators - their language. It isn't for the faint-hearted or the intellectually lazy - you have to learn the language!
Hauser helps us on that road of getting into the minds and worldviews of those dead societies... we become archaeologists of art, reconstructing the pieces so that these works can speak.
April 23, 2023
THE SOCIAL HISTORY OF ART, VOLUME 1 (first published in 1951) is a scholarly text which explores western art history from a social perspective. Starting with the Paleolithic, Arnold Hauser attempts to identify the social factors which were relevant to the production of a given artistic phenomenon at a particular time.
This approach to the subject is very different from the formalist focus of standard art histories which are so widely available. You will find no images inside this book, rather the author seems to expect that you know what he is writing about.
Hauser belonged to a generation which still believed that society could be transformed by means of a social, political and cultural struggle. He thought art could work as a vehicle of change because it enables us to discover the real underlying ideology and alienation of modern society if we only have a full understanding of every artistic manifestation.
Hauser is mostly interested in western painting, architecture and literature, to a lesser extent. He is lucid, erudite and extremely centered on sociological and economic issues. I wouldn't recommend this book to beginners or readers not interested in his particular perspective.
This approach to the subject is very different from the formalist focus of standard art histories which are so widely available. You will find no images inside this book, rather the author seems to expect that you know what he is writing about.
Hauser belonged to a generation which still believed that society could be transformed by means of a social, political and cultural struggle. He thought art could work as a vehicle of change because it enables us to discover the real underlying ideology and alienation of modern society if we only have a full understanding of every artistic manifestation.
Hauser is mostly interested in western painting, architecture and literature, to a lesser extent. He is lucid, erudite and extremely centered on sociological and economic issues. I wouldn't recommend this book to beginners or readers not interested in his particular perspective.
January 19, 2018
Absolutely genius. Sure, there’s slight disappointment related to the relative lack of direct examples, no mention of the Black Plague, and the fact that “art” is treated, more often than not, as literature, and I disagreed with the emphasis of some points here and there, but that hardly dampens what is a magnum opus, a treasure trove, a diamond mine of insight. I likely learned more about the nuanced machinations of history from this volume than I have from any other one book. And the helpful use of the terms “impressionism,” “baroque,” “rococo,” and “expressionism” throughout highlights trends that will, later on in art history, become full-blown periods. This can’t come more highly recommended.
May 1, 2015
سعيدة بمجرد مس هذه العوالم ..
Read
July 19, 2021Rarely convincing, often quite thought-provoking. Everybody knows that art is social now, but the how and the why of that sociality is still up for debate— or more often, simply assumed, and Hauser offers us a useful vantage point on our received knowledge. Additionally, I think it’s easy to get lost in the marketplace of aesthetic choices that we know as contemporary art, and Hauser’s long view of history feels like a necessary corrective to today’s eternal present.
Hauser’s vaguely marxist “social” focus is interesting, too, since even in volume 1, he strikes a somewhat ambivalent note in relation to the popular front’s determinism and preference for realism: he also tends toward both, but with a little qualifying nuance. (He’s closer to Lukacs than Adorno, by far, but not as much as his critics sometimes suppose.) So this work is fun to read as a kind of climax/limit point for the grand claims which mid-century socialists might have used to make sense of art at the time. I think I need to read later volumes to get a better sense of how well the book actually performs this task.
Even if we admit the possibility of a single “story of art,” Hauser’s European fixation totally precludes his success in this endeavor. It also allows him to rely on what I would term “stock” history, even if he does do well at setting the record straight in some cases (for example, with respect to periodization in the Middle Ages). And as almost all critics have noted, his definition of what counts as art is also more or less predetermined by his cultural milieu and schooling. So, my advice to other readers is to take the narrative with a grain of salt, read critically and enjoy the ride. Try to see the forest thru the trees, but also remember that you’re only getting one perspective on the forest. Nevertheless, Hauser’s identification of many important historical features of art feels compelling, even if it is only because the dominant euro/euro-American culture industry still structures expectations for a now-global art market and art public, and still conditions “our” expectations for how an artist should be in and relate to society at large.
I’m reading all four volumes for a class, and right now I can say that Hauser’s social history feels useful but insufficient. Still, it’s a great jumping-off point for further study.
Hauser’s vaguely marxist “social” focus is interesting, too, since even in volume 1, he strikes a somewhat ambivalent note in relation to the popular front’s determinism and preference for realism: he also tends toward both, but with a little qualifying nuance. (He’s closer to Lukacs than Adorno, by far, but not as much as his critics sometimes suppose.) So this work is fun to read as a kind of climax/limit point for the grand claims which mid-century socialists might have used to make sense of art at the time. I think I need to read later volumes to get a better sense of how well the book actually performs this task.
Even if we admit the possibility of a single “story of art,” Hauser’s European fixation totally precludes his success in this endeavor. It also allows him to rely on what I would term “stock” history, even if he does do well at setting the record straight in some cases (for example, with respect to periodization in the Middle Ages). And as almost all critics have noted, his definition of what counts as art is also more or less predetermined by his cultural milieu and schooling. So, my advice to other readers is to take the narrative with a grain of salt, read critically and enjoy the ride. Try to see the forest thru the trees, but also remember that you’re only getting one perspective on the forest. Nevertheless, Hauser’s identification of many important historical features of art feels compelling, even if it is only because the dominant euro/euro-American culture industry still structures expectations for a now-global art market and art public, and still conditions “our” expectations for how an artist should be in and relate to society at large.
I’m reading all four volumes for a class, and right now I can say that Hauser’s social history feels useful but insufficient. Still, it’s a great jumping-off point for further study.
December 16, 2007
جلد اول به هنر دوران های ماقبل تاریخ تا قرون وسطی و اوایل دوره ی رنسانس می پردازد (بخش اول به ادبیات مصر و آشور و بابل، ادبیات چین و هند، بخش دوم شامل ادبیات یونان باستان، بخش سوم به رم باستان، بخش چهارم به ادبیات شرق در سده های میانه، به ویژه چین و در بخش آخر به ادبیات سده های میانه در آلمان، بریتانیا، فرانسه، اسپانیا و ایتالیا)، همراه با تصاویری از هنر دوران غارنشینی انسان.
جلد دوم به ادبیات ایتالیا و آلمان در دوره ی رنسانس، و سپس از هفده تا اوایل قرن بیستم می پردازد (ایتالیا، سر دمدار ادبیات پیشرو در رنسانس، فرانسه تا سده های هفده و هژده و عصر رمانتیک، و سده ی نوزده و بیست، مکاتب واقع گرایی و نمادگرایی و... بخش سوم شامل ادبیات اسپانیاست که از "دوران طلایی" (عصر دن کیخوته) آغاز می شود و تا پایان قرن نوزدهم ادامه داده)، بخش بعدی در مورد ادبیات روسیه از عصر طلایی، ابتدای قرن نوزده تا اوایل قرن بیستم است.
و جلد سوم به هنر "روکوکو"، "کلاسی سیسم" و "رمانتی سیسم" اختصاص دارد، حاوی تصاویری از هر سه مکتب دوره ی رنسانس است. (ادبیات آمریکا از دوران مهاجرنشینی و سپس انقلاب و دوران پس از پیروزی تا جنگ اول جهانی، بخش دوم شامل ادبیات انگلیس از سده های میانه، هفدهم تا سده ی بیستم).
جلد چهارم به ناتورالیسم، امپرسیونیسم و عمدتن مکاتب هنری تا ابتدای قرن بیستم می پردازد، و حتی در یک فصل، به "عصر فیلم" نیز اشاره هایی دارد. برخلاف سه جلد اول، جلد چهارم در فارسی، دارای فهرست مطالب است و در انتها بخشی هم به "اضافات" از جمله برندگان نوبل می پردازد. اهمیت پژوهش عظیم آرنولد هاوزر در مجلدات سوم و چهارم بیشتر مشهود است. آرنولد هاوزر (1978-1892)، متخصص تاریخ هنر، رمانیایی ساکن مجارستان، بر مینای تاثیرات اجتماعی بر هنر انسان در طول تاریخ، و برعکس، نوشته شده. تاریخ اجتماعی هنر برای بسیاری از پژوهشگران جامعه شناختی، منبع بسیار با ارزشی ست. همت ترجمه و انتشار چنین اثری در زبان فارسی به راستی ستودنی ست. کتاب را امین موید به فارسی برگردانده و چاپ دوم آن در1361 توسط چاپخش منتشر شده است.
When the work appeared in English in the 1950s, it stirred up great controversy because of its ideological orientation. Postmodernist art historians have rarely made references to Hauser's fundamental study. Arnold Hauser was born in Temesvar, Hungarian. In Paris his teacher was Henri Bergson who influenced him deeply. In Budapest Hauser became a member of the Budapest Sunday Circle, which was formed around the critic and philosopher György Lukács. The group included Karl Mannheim, a sociologist, the writers Béla Balázs, and the musicians Béla Bartók and
جلد دوم به ادبیات ایتالیا و آلمان در دوره ی رنسانس، و سپس از هفده تا اوایل قرن بیستم می پردازد (ایتالیا، سر دمدار ادبیات پیشرو در رنسانس، فرانسه تا سده های هفده و هژده و عصر رمانتیک، و سده ی نوزده و بیست، مکاتب واقع گرایی و نمادگرایی و... بخش سوم شامل ادبیات اسپانیاست که از "دوران طلایی" (عصر دن کیخوته) آغاز می شود و تا پایان قرن نوزدهم ادامه داده)، بخش بعدی در مورد ادبیات روسیه از عصر طلایی، ابتدای قرن نوزده تا اوایل قرن بیستم است.
و جلد سوم به هنر "روکوکو"، "کلاسی سیسم" و "رمانتی سیسم" اختصاص دارد، حاوی تصاویری از هر سه مکتب دوره ی رنسانس است. (ادبیات آمریکا از دوران مهاجرنشینی و سپس انقلاب و دوران پس از پیروزی تا جنگ اول جهانی، بخش دوم شامل ادبیات انگلیس از سده های میانه، هفدهم تا سده ی بیستم).
جلد چهارم به ناتورالیسم، امپرسیونیسم و عمدتن مکاتب هنری تا ابتدای قرن بیستم می پردازد، و حتی در یک فصل، به "عصر فیلم" نیز اشاره هایی دارد. برخلاف سه جلد اول، جلد چهارم در فارسی، دارای فهرست مطالب است و در انتها بخشی هم به "اضافات" از جمله برندگان نوبل می پردازد. اهمیت پژوهش عظیم آرنولد هاوزر در مجلدات سوم و چهارم بیشتر مشهود است. آرنولد هاوزر (1978-1892)، متخصص تاریخ هنر، رمانیایی ساکن مجارستان، بر مینای تاثیرات اجتماعی بر هنر انسان در طول تاریخ، و برعکس، نوشته شده. تاریخ اجتماعی هنر برای بسیاری از پژوهشگران جامعه شناختی، منبع بسیار با ارزشی ست. همت ترجمه و انتشار چنین اثری در زبان فارسی به راستی ستودنی ست. کتاب را امین موید به فارسی برگردانده و چاپ دوم آن در1361 توسط چاپخش منتشر شده است.
When the work appeared in English in the 1950s, it stirred up great controversy because of its ideological orientation. Postmodernist art historians have rarely made references to Hauser's fundamental study. Arnold Hauser was born in Temesvar, Hungarian. In Paris his teacher was Henri Bergson who influenced him deeply. In Budapest Hauser became a member of the Budapest Sunday Circle, which was formed around the critic and philosopher György Lukács. The group included Karl Mannheim, a sociologist, the writers Béla Balázs, and the musicians Béla Bartók and
August 25, 2020
حاولت أقرا الكتاب بجزئيه أكتر من مره، ولصعوبته الشديدة كنت أتركه في كل مرة. وللأسف الشديد لازال الكتاب دسم ووعر لا يستجيب بسهولة .
اكتفيت بالاطلاع علي الجزئين مع قراءة بعض فصول الجزء الأول
اكتفيت بالاطلاع علي الجزئين مع قراءة بعض فصول الجزء الأول
July 18, 2021
To begin an art history book with prehistory is prudently paradoxical. I wouldn't understand what it means for a work of art to belong to "art history" without first seeing some art that is NOT part of history. Also it turns out that cave paintings rule. The material on the middle ages is pretty subversive, I think? The gothic era is urban, secular, feminine, and modern; romantic love is a working-through of suppressed eroticism. (p.s. the latter claim is less cynical than it seems if you think of romance not as a story we tell ourselves ABOUT sex, but a story we tell USING sex)
Hauser sees each historical moment barreling towards the present, recklessly unfolding new possibilities and then leaving them incompletely fulfilled and unfulfillable as soon as it turns over something new. This is an optimistic history, too optimistic to be anything but a history of all time !
Sadly, the book contains few pictures. I recommend the Louvre's very searchable and comprehensive online database to see examples of the styles discussed: https://collections.louvre.fr/en/
Hauser sees each historical moment barreling towards the present, recklessly unfolding new possibilities and then leaving them incompletely fulfilled and unfulfillable as soon as it turns over something new. This is an optimistic history, too optimistic to be anything but a history of all time !
Sadly, the book contains few pictures. I recommend the Louvre's very searchable and comprehensive online database to see examples of the styles discussed: https://collections.louvre.fr/en/
July 20, 2024
Quite a weird introduction that seems to be written with no love for this book.
It’s a journey in think brushstrokes throughout history and social conditions revolving the arts. A very interesting read.
It’s a journey in think brushstrokes throughout history and social conditions revolving the arts. A very interesting read.
April 19, 2020
کتاب دربارهی روندهای اجتماعی، سیاسی و اقتصادی پشت جریانهای هنری و ادبیه. جلد اولش از نقاشیهای توی غار شروع شده - یعنی زمانی که تلقی آدمها از هنر جادو بوده - تا پایان دورهی گوتیک. من دارم در کنار «هنر در گذر زمان» میخونمش و بهنظرم کمک میکنه به اینکه فهم عمیقتری از تاریخ هنر و عوامل تأثیرگذار درونش داشته باشی، مخصوصاً که فقط دربارهی هنرهای تجسمی و معماری نیست و ادبیات و شعر و تئاتر رو هم دربرمیگیره. جای موسیقی که فعلاً خالی بوده، نمیدونم در جلدهای بعدی بهش اشاره میشه یا نه. یه جاهایی یه کم حوصلهسربر میشد که امیدوارم باز در جلدهای بعدی بهتر شه. شاید هم برای نثر و ترجمهی قدیمیش باشه، نمیدونم.
May 13, 2016
Εξαιρετικό βιβλίο! Ο Hauser βυθίζει τον αναγνώστη στις ιδιαίτερες λεπτομέρειες των διαφορετικών κοινωνικών δομών. Εξηγεί με ευκολονόητο και καλογραμμένο τρόπο τις εκάστοτε οικονομικές και κοινωνικές συνθήκες και μεταβολές, τη σημασία τους, καθώς και τον τρόπο που επηρέασαν ή επηρεάζονταν από την κυρίαρχη σε κάθε κοινωνία οπτική. Προσωπικά, διαφωνώ με την οικονομοκεντρική αντίληψη του συγγραφέα που σε ορισμένα σημεία θεωρώ πως δημιουργεί αντιφάσεις και κενά, παρόλα αυτά το βιβλίο είναι ευανάγνωστο, με μεγάλο πλούτο πληροφοριών και πολύ ενδιαφέρουσα ανάλυση.
June 30, 2024
Is there no Hauser estate--or no one at Routledge--to prevent Johnathan Harris from prepending as both intro and summary his crummy, condescending, two-star review to this great work? In its heyday, twenty-five years ago, it seemed to me--and it seems to me still--that the philosophy of the New Historicists was simply to reject everything interesting or inspiring about the kind of Historicism that Hauser represents. Art has no value transcending its particular historic0-materialist circumstances; Marx has been permanently discredited with the Structuralists and the Frankfurt school; the inspiring recognition of homologies are only ever subjective equivocations. Far be it for an intellectual to stretch for understandings that would go beyond reducing any aesthetic experience to its sanctioned key terms.
Anyway, I could never with confidence call myself a Marxist, but screw this guy. He has every fault he accuses Hauser of: arrogance, lack of self-reflection, and a misplaced reliance on unproblematized terms from outdated systems. If I cannot convince you to skip his introduction and his volume summaries, I would at least urge you to keep reading beyond them. To do so is to find that Hauser is erudite, ambitious, and bold...in ways that must not even show up as blips on Harris' radar.
The schema Hauser suggests to organize the material of the history is, by design, both simple and feasible: charting the relations between social systems and a spectrum from naturalistic to symbolic representations--but it is astonishing and delightful to see how much historical data can be made sense of in this way, and how useful the map becomes. Where one would expect the model to strain, it also uncovers unexpected social nuances that translate into artistic ones. I found it very exciting and very helpful. It made a lot of art (especially from the Middle Ages) visible to me in a way it scarcely was before. Most of all, I found Hauser's voice to be so intelligent and so infectiously passionate. Can't wait to read the remaining volumes.
Anyway, I could never with confidence call myself a Marxist, but screw this guy. He has every fault he accuses Hauser of: arrogance, lack of self-reflection, and a misplaced reliance on unproblematized terms from outdated systems. If I cannot convince you to skip his introduction and his volume summaries, I would at least urge you to keep reading beyond them. To do so is to find that Hauser is erudite, ambitious, and bold...in ways that must not even show up as blips on Harris' radar.
The schema Hauser suggests to organize the material of the history is, by design, both simple and feasible: charting the relations between social systems and a spectrum from naturalistic to symbolic representations--but it is astonishing and delightful to see how much historical data can be made sense of in this way, and how useful the map becomes. Where one would expect the model to strain, it also uncovers unexpected social nuances that translate into artistic ones. I found it very exciting and very helpful. It made a lot of art (especially from the Middle Ages) visible to me in a way it scarcely was before. Most of all, I found Hauser's voice to be so intelligent and so infectiously passionate. Can't wait to read the remaining volumes.
July 11, 2019
This, is probably one of the most laborious book I've ever read. It doesn't mean Hauser is doing Kantian or Hegelian style mind game in his book but man, when every page is like a revelation, and pages after pages you find references and materials rampaging your own knowledge stock - hello and welcome to the world of Arnold Hauser! *crying violently*
Hauser's approach is of eclecticism, and roasting 19'c German romanticism criticism myth is happening all the way to the end, their folk song tradition theory and collective spirit in literature creation totally irritate him.
Here's some key words I think must be noticed: geometrical, frontality, naturalism, extension of reality, magic, individualism, convention, court, from court to lower, social conflicts, psychological element, personal feelings, etc.
Come back to edit this review later.
Hauser's approach is of eclecticism, and roasting 19'c German romanticism criticism myth is happening all the way to the end, their folk song tradition theory and collective spirit in literature creation totally irritate him.
Here's some key words I think must be noticed: geometrical, frontality, naturalism, extension of reality, magic, individualism, convention, court, from court to lower, social conflicts, psychological element, personal feelings, etc.
Come back to edit this review later.
January 10, 2023
Εξαιρετικός κι αυτός ο τόμος της τετράτομης κοινωνικής ιστορίας της τέχνης του Χάουζερ. Πυκνή γραφή και πυκνή γνώση. Κι εδώ η ελαφρώς μαρξιστική οπτική του συγγραφέα χρησιμοποιείται για να εξηγηθεί και να ερμηνευτεί η κοινωνική διάρθρωση σε κάθε εποχή και ο ρόλος των εξουσιών, κράτους, θρησκείας, φεουδαλισμού, οι συνθήκες του πρωτο-καπιταλισμού και άλλοι παράγοντες, στην διαμόρφωση και ανάπτυξη της τέχνης και των καλλιτεχνών. Μικρό σχετικά το μέρος που αφορά την αρχαία Ανατολή και την αρχαία Ελλάδα, εκτενέστατο στον Μεσαίωνα και στην λογοτεχνία/ποίηση ενώ απουσιάζει κάθε αναφορά στην πανούκλα.
August 25, 2021
Το διάβασα αυτό το βιβλίο λόγω της ιστορίας της τέχνης που είχα στο πανεπιστήμιο.. αρκετά ενδιαφέρον
November 14, 2021
This is Sociology masquerading as art criticism.
December 22, 2022
This might be described as the best synthesis of cultural history ever written.
February 8, 2016
I really enjoyed this book and just ordered the other three volumes. Its fascinating how art changes with the times and what forces in society effect those changes. It gave me a good understanding of the processes at work.
June 7, 2008
Excelente libro si de teoría se trata.
=)
=)
January 13, 2011
la parte de literatura es pura fruta. Se nota que el autor tiene una interpretacion de la historia desde el marxismo.
September 5, 2012
Podría leerlo una y otra vez
November 23, 2012
Imprescindible.
October 28, 2014
É o melhor livro de história da arte que já li.
Mudou radicalmente minha visão sobre o assunto: me deu profundidade, me fez repensar o papel do artista na sociedade.
Leitura obrigatória.
Mudou radicalmente minha visão sobre o assunto: me deu profundidade, me fez repensar o papel do artista na sociedade.
Leitura obrigatória.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews