Written in Water: The Ephemeral Life of the Classic in Art

by Rochelle Gurstein

A deeply personal yet broadly relevant exploration of the ephemeral life of the classic in art, from the eighteenth century to our own day
 
Is there such a thing as a timeless classic? More than a decade ago, Rochelle Gurstein set out to explore and establish a solid foundation for the classic in the history of taste. To her surprise, that history instead revealed repeated episodes of soaring and falling reputations, rediscoveries of long-forgotten artists, and radical shifts in the canon, all of which went so completely against common knowledge that it was hard to believe it was true.
 
Where does the idea of the timeless classic come from? And how has it become so fiercely contested? By recovering disputes about works of art from the eighteenth century to the close of the twentieth, Gurstein takes us into unfamiliar aesthetic and moral terrain, providing a richly imagined historical alternative to accounts offered by both cultural theorists advancing attacks on the politics of taste and those who continue to cling to the ideal of universal values embodied in the classic. As Gurstein brings to life the competing responses of generations of artists, art lovers, and critics to specific works of art, she makes us see the same object vividly and directly through their eyes and feel, in all its enlarging intensity, what they felt.

Genres: Art

520 pages, Hardcover

Published May 28, 2024

Reviews

[Marks54 · Rating 4 out of 5]

I did not think I would stick with this one, but it was engaging and hard not to think about.

As an aside, I recently returned from traveling in Europe, which - especially because the weather was so hot - involved spending considerable time in museums in Stockholm, Oslo, Bern, Lugano, and Vienna, among others. After doing so, I will admit to my continued difficulties in accessing modern and especially post-modern art. These continue despite my continued efforts to read and sympathetically observe the work. I am left wondering what the standard is that I can use and how do I get my arms around the work to experience it to the fullest. I will not mention specific artists.

So I was intrigued to run across Rochelle Gurstein’s new book “Written in Water”. She is an historian and critic who has written a memoir of sorts to investigate whether there is indeed a timeless standard for “classics” in art, those works that would transcend particular times and intellectual quarrels and represent a clear exemplar of what great art could be. After some research and much thought, however, she discovers that the idea of the classic is a relatively recent one and that the history of art does not display the continuity of evaluations of quality that she expected. As an historian, the prospect that artistic standards would be very much influenced by the historical and sociocultural context in which art was produced likely loomed large in her thinking.

What follows is a long and fairly detailed reexamination of the nature of art, popular renown in art, the rise and fall of “classics” and lots of other related issues. In the process, she goes through the critical names in art criticism over the late 18th century and into the 19th and 20th centuries, providing a clear history of criticism (with lots of good references). This is a detailed analysis that will require further reading by me as a follow-up. It will certainly help on my next museum tour. I especially appreciate her analysis of post-Impressionism, which has long interested me. Then, consistent with my reactions, the wheels seem to come off the bus with post-modernism. This is hardly surprising.

Part of the interest of the book for me was that I had not read any of these earlier critics, although I had heard of some of them. I am less clear about how solid the analysis is or whether the reader get a relatively detailed tour of art history approaches - which have been around for a while. I will give Ms.
Gurstein the benefit of the doubt here, since her book caught and held my attention and rang true with my recent experiences. I will have to see how it holds up. It was an enjoyable booik and I recommend it for interesting readers.

I do not generally find art criticism engaging but this was an exception.

[Cindy · Rating 3 out of 5]

In the 19th century there was a statue that was probably more famous than the Mona Lisa is today. It was the piece of art most visitors wanted to see when they toured Europe. It was written about everywhere and everyone who was at all educated knew about it. It was called the Venus de' Medici and today most of us have never heard of it. When she learned this, Rochelle Gurstein decided to research the history of what makes a classic work of art and how that label could be "written in water" - subject to change as tastes change.
I was interested in this question and I appreciated all the examples Gurstein gave. I certainly learned much about art history, and specifically about the history of art criticism. I did find the book a bit long, though. Gurstein quotes extensively from books by art experts through the ages and sometimes the language of those excerpts was a little hard for a modern reader to follow. It certainly didn't make for light reading. This is an excellent book for those who are seriously interested in this topic.
Thanks to NetGalley for a free digital copy in exchange for an honest review.

[Robyn · Rating 4 out of 5]

Let me first say that I read the ARC of this book from #NetGalley, not the physical copy of this book. As a consequence, this has significantly impacted my engagement with this text.

Given that I received a proof copy of the eBook for this text, I elected to read only selected sections of this book. I found it challenging to read this book for that reason. However, what I did read was engaging, so much so that I plan to get a physical copy of the book to examine the art that accompanies the text.

From the selections I did read, I enjoyed diving deeper into the narratives behind the art and artists selected for examination. Reading the introduction and the chapter on Art as a Substitute for Religion in the proof copy was enough to inspire me to seek out a physical copy of this book.

That may not be the endorsement the publishers are looking for, but given how dry nonfiction scholarly research can be, I think it speaks volumes about this publication.

[Katy Wheatley · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is an exploration of where in art history the idea of a piece of classic art as an inspiration and a model for current and future artists came from. It focuses its attention most particularly on the art of Renaissance Italy and its subsequent discovery and rediscovery over the centuries. It looks at what this dominating model gives to the art world but also what it takes away. If I'm honest, I found this hard going. It's very scholarly and very long. In terms of my own interest in art it was also rather frustrating, in that it focuses on a group of men, writing about other men and building a case for gatekeeping the idea of perfection in art to a small band of wealthy, connected men. The author's findings were not particularly surprising to me but that may be to do with the way that I was taught to think about art. I'm sure if your interests are in the classical canon and you wanted to interrogate its rise and fall, this would be excellent.

[Joel Zartman · Rating 3 out of 5]

Gurstein set out to distill the essence of what is classic in the kind of art our civilization keeps in museums. She found that artists and critics have changed their idea of what is classic over time until it has dissolved. She proceeds by examining documents, starting with Joshua Reynolds and moving a few decades at a time, explaining what the leading appreciators of each period promoted. In a way, the book is a plea for ideals. As long as we can make an ideal out of something, we can have enlightening art.

It is apparent that, without the sacred, the whole thing unravels. There is, of course, no examination of how Western art before the quattrocento arose. I am no art critic, but I have the feeling that the category of the sacred was replaced by the aesthetic, and that replacement was a net loss. It is interesting to read that Walter Pater was, in later life, embarrassed by how much he relied on natural theology to substantiate his highest claims for art. To me, the book is a demonstration of the strengths and weaknesses of still promoting humane enlightenment. It makes me think of what Roger Scruton said about the Enlightenment being a kind of light pollution: we turn on the lights on all that humanity has below and lose sight of all that is above and beyond.

It is a difficult book, and I can't say that I went through all of it with care. The minute examination of what a period's art gurus said has to be somewhat recondite. It is livened up with all that can liven it: anecdotes, background, reproductions, etc. It makes for an interesting trajectory but also disappointingly modest conclusions.

[Nat]

Incredibly dense and interesting—essential reading for thinking about changing ways of thinking about aesthetic judgement.