Call for Participation in
Sessions Soliciting Contributors
CAA 107th Annual Conference
New York, February 13–16, 2019
Welcome to the 2019 Call for Participation. CAA seeks paper and/or project proposals for the Sessions Seeking Contributors listed on this webpage. The Sessions were selected by the CAA Annual Conference Committee from submissions by members. These sessions have not been edited by CAA. This webpage represents only a portion of the full conference content and does not include Complete and Composed Sessions.
Sessions are listed alphabetically by title. Affiliated Societies and CAA Professional Committees that have sessions included in the Call for Participation will have the names of their organizations listed in between the title of the session and the chair’s name. Chairs develop sessions according to topics and themes in their abstracts. We encourage chairs to consider alternate, engaging formats other than consecutive readings of papers. All conference sessions are ninety minutes in length. For a traditional four-person panel, we recommend that each presenter not exceed fifteen minutes in order to allow time for questions and discussion.
Please note that all of the information on this webpage is listed exactly as it was submitted. If an individual’s affiliation or contact information is not listed, it was not provided in the submission form.
INSTRUCTIONS TO SUBMIT PAPERS/PROJECTS TO SESSION CHAIRS
Deadline: August 6, 2018
Email the following directly to session chair(s):
- Completed session participation proposal form. Make sure your name appears EXACTLY as you would like it listed in the conference program and conference website.
- Paper/project abstract: maximum 250 words, as a single paragraph MS Word Document. Make sure your title and abstract appear EXACTLY as you would like them published in the conference program, Abstracts 2019, and the CAA website.
- Email explaining your interest in the session, expertise in the topic, and availability during the conference.
- A shortened CV (close to 2 pages)
- (Optional) Documentation of work when appropriate, (as PDF) especially for sessions in which artists might discuss their own practice.
GUIDELINES FOR PARTICIPANTS
- A paper that has been published previously or presented at another scholarly conference may not be delivered at the CAA Annual Conference.
- All session participants, including presenters, chairs, and discussants, must be current individual members of CAA through February 16, 2019 to participate in the Annual Conference. Inactive members will be removed from session listings after August 28, 2018.
- All session participants must also register for the conference in some capacity. Early conference registration opens online early October. Information about alternate conference registration options, including single-session tickets, will be posted on the CAA website in the fall. While there will be a variety of conference registration options for CAA 2019, all participants must at least register using a single-session ticket to their own session.
- All session participants may take part in the conference in up to three ways. They may serve as a: 1) Session chair; 2) Paper/Project Presenter; and/or 3) Session Discussant. Each member may not, however, serve a single role more than once in a particular conference year (i.e. serve as a presenter in two different panels, chair two sessions, serve as a discussant or Q&A leader on multiple panels, etc.). Because of this, you must inform session chair(s) if you are submitting one or more paper/project proposals to other sessions in the 2019 Call for Participation.
- If your Individual Paper/Project proposal was accepted to a Composed Session during the spring open call, but you would prefer to participate in one of the chaired sessions listed here the 2019 Call for Participation, you must inform the CFP chair(s) of this previous acceptance in your application form. You will not be removed from the Composed Session unless your paper/project is accepted by the chair(s) of the CFP session. Upon acceptance to a CFP session, you must inform CAA of your need to be removed from the Composed Session.
SESSIONS SEEKING CONTRIBUTORS
**Please note: To find a session by keyword, please search by pressing [Control] + F (Windows) or [Command] + F (Mac) on your keyboard.
10th Critical Craft Forum: Craft Scholarship in the Next Ten Years
Chair: Namita G. Wiggers - Warren Wilson College and Critical Craft Forum
Chair: Jenni Sorkin
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
This session is a call for papers on craft from currently enrolled graduate students and recent graduates (2 years since degree completion). Presentations will be 8 minutes in length, with a discussion led by the co-chairs to follow; up to 8 papers may be accepted. Papers should present original research, and may address, for example: craft history, theory, exhibitions, indigeneity, diaspora, colonialism, gender, economies, film, or pedagogy. In 2018, the CAA Conference daily schedule included an unprecedented number of papers and sessions connected to craft. In recognition of the 10th Critical Craft Forum session at CAA, this panel showcases the next generation of craft scholarship. Discussion will focus on what questions and topics students are considering, how to support ongoing scholarship on craft, and how to mentor into the future.
A Carolingian Legacy in the Arts of Normandy and Anglo-Norman England
Chair: Terence F. Bertrand Dewsnap - State University of New York at New Paltz, Dept. of Art History
To medieval authors such as Orderic Vitalis, Charlemagne represented the rebirth of the Holy Roman Empire in the west. While Constantine was a magnificent ruler and a champion of Christianity, Charlemagne had improved on him, navigating history along its proper course. “The crowning of Charlemagne maintained the glitter and myth of Rome.” (Marie-Dominique Chenu) The Norman dynasty from its foundation in the tenth century within the territory that was once Carolingian Neustria claimed a special relationship with its predecessor, rebuilding church and state after Carolingian paradigms. During the period of the Conquest of England in the eleventh century, the Norman party evoked Charlemagne as a model for William’s sacral, quasi-imperial nature. They recognized that as the Carolingians had replaced the Merovingian dynasty, so the Normans replaced the English. This session invites research into the Carolingian legacy in Normandy and England from the tenth to the twelfth century as it took form in the visual arts (defined broadly to include architecture, painting, sculpture, decorative arts, and their use in court and liturgical ceremony). Participants might consider (though are not limited to) issues such as continuity versus revival, the meaning of kingship and empire, copies and their implications, the iconography of architecture, memory and the creation of history.
A Global History of Early Modern Bronze
Chair: Sofia Gans
Despite great geographic and temporal diversity, artisans have long approached the material of bronze in similar ways. For instance, the makers of bronzes during the Chola dynasty in India employed lost-wax casting techniques similar to those used in the Meuse River valley. And yet, technical and material studies of bronze and copper alloy objects often center around the works of a particular artist or geographic region. In the early modern period in particular, studies of the processes of making bronze sculpture have been largely limited to the innovations of the Italian peninsula (see Stone on Antico and Severo da Ravenna, Sturman on Giambologna, Cole on Cellini, or Bewer on de Vries). This panel seeks not only to look beyond traditional studies of individual workshops’ approaches to making in bronze, but also to compare early modern approaches beyond an Italo-centric or western European framework. How did knowledge about casting travel? How might we interrogate the traditional distinctions between direct and indirect casting technology? How did shared approaches to casting develop? How might we place disparate traditions into dialogue with one another? The session will invite papers from art historians and conservators working on comparative approaches to early modern bronze casting, hoping to convene a panel that engages non-western and western, northern and southern approaches to the material of bronze on a continuous spectrum. By doing so, we hope to reveal new avenues for the study of early modern bronze casting as a global phenomenon.
A World in Light: Impressionism in a Global Context, 1860-1920
Chair: Katerina L Atanassova
The advent of Impressionism is considered by many as a watershed moment in visual culture between the 1860s and 1920s. By the late-1880s, Impressionism radiated outwards across the world as foreign artists at the turn of the nineteenth century flocked to the Parisian academies, absorbed avant-garde painting techniques, and then returned home, bringing with them a new style of painting and a new vision with which to interpret their homelands. From Spain, Belgium, Sweden, England to the United States, Canada and Australia, artists adopted Impressionism, highlighting painting en plein air, colour, light, atmospheric effects and depicting scenes of contemporary life in their work. While its development in France has received intense focus in the art historical narrative of the country, scholars across the globe are now turning their attention on the movement and its spread elsewhere.
These expatriate artists who adopted Impressionist tenets were at the forefront of the artistic milieu upon their return home. In many countries, these artists led the charge in the advent of modernity. They often had to adapt the techniques they learned in Europe to their own cultural and aesthetic contexts. The work of these artists influenced the next generations of painters, and new ways of interpreting their homelands. Speakers in this session will discuss the dissemination of Impressionism beyond Europe, and focus on how artists from around the world adapted to the global language of Impressionism by pushing toward a modernist approach in portraying their countries.
Achaemenid Persian Art and Architecture in the Museum
Chair: Alexander Nagel - Smithsonian Institution, National Museum of Natural History
Chair: Martina Rugiadi
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Between c. 520 and 330 BCE, the Achaemenid Persian Empire stretched from the heartlands of Iran, to Egypt, the Caucasus, the Indus, Central Asia and beyond. Since its rediscovery in the 17th century, the art and architecture from the monumental palaces on sites such as Persepolis, Susa, and Babylon found their ways into institutions within Iran, other parts of Asia, Europe and the North Americas.
This session will address aspects of the art histories and historiographies of display and conservation of Achaemenid Persian art in the museum context. Who were the designers, curators, art historians and key individuals involved in the display? What narratives were presented? How imaginative were modern constructions in Paris, New York, Washington, D.C., London, Berlin and Tehran? How is Achaemenid Persian art conserved and displayed in museums today? How is the display of this great ancient empire balanced alongside ancient Egyptian and classical Greek architecture and Islamic art and architecture in museum pedagogy?
Based on new research in archives of art historians, curators and collections, session participants will discuss aspects of the history of display and inclusion and exclusion of Achaemenid art in museum displays providing fresh approaches to aspects of the legacy of ancient Near Eastern art and architecture in the museum institution. The session will feature an interactive display curated by students from New York City. This display will allow audience members to engage with the art of pre-Islamic Iran in an experimental and innovative way.
Africa, Technology, and Visual Cultures
Arts Council of the African Studies Association
Chair: Amanda Kay Gilvin - Wellesley College
Artist Fatimah Tuggar has observed, “A hammer and a computer are the same kinds of things. Each is a tool for a specific purpose.” Her insistence on their radical parity points to the ways that ideologies around technology have shaped the production and interpretation of art, especially in cross-cultural encounters. This panel specifically examines the meanings of technology in African art and in depictions of Africa. Many African art technologies, such as looms for hand weaving, are associated with the symbolic import of the finished product. Throughout the past several centuries, misunderstandings concerning technology have been central to European and Euro-American representation of African and African Diasporic arts and cultures. Even as primitivist depictions of Africa denigrated diverse aesthetics and skills from across the continent, the artistic and agricultural technological knowledge of enslaved Africans was often explicitly valued in the antebellum United States. Africa continues to be a site of invention, experimentation, and adaptation in both handmade and digital tools for art-making, often combining expert tradition-based artisanry with new media like virtual reality. The recent blockbuster film Black Panther builds on a long history of science fiction and Afrofuturist explorations of how real and imagined technologies could be differently racialized. This panel invites papers that analyze how artists of Africa and the African Diaspora have invented, used, and interpreted technology, as well as papers considering depictions of Africa’s relationship to technology.
American Nationalisms Inside and Outside of the Academy from 1800 to the Present
Chair: Ray Hernández-Durán - MSC04 2560 - University of
This session aims to examine the complex relationships between art academies and expressions of nationalism throughout the Americas during the nineteenth- and early twentieth centuries. Notable academies were founded in Mexico (1781), the U.S. (1805), Brazil (1816), Cuba (1818), Canada (1880), and Peru (1918), each institution shaped by the unique peculiarities of its immediate socio-political environment. History painting – the most esteemed genre of academic art - beyond revealing institutional and cultural ideologies, also veiled or erased alternate historical perspectives. All communities record or commemorate historical events, many in forms not readily correspondent to the kinds of official art forms promoted or recognized by the academies. A central concern is to revisit academic history painting and widen the lens to consider non-official or extra-academic historical production.
Relevant questions include the following: How can we approach alternate or marginalized historical expressions and narratives, and what are the problems or issues that arise when trying to accommodate such forms into “traditional” academic and/or museological frameworks? How did art academies contribute to the formation of modern citizens in nations with diverse populations? What types of visual idioms were deployed by academies to shape national consciousness and what kinds of reception did these visual forms experience among varied audiences? Have art academies ever served as mechanisms of institutional critique and/or social change? What are the legacies of these earlier academic enterprises in current exhibition practices and in conceptions or expressions of national identity today? Papers that consider these and/or other pertinent questions
Analogy + Interaction .. creating a context for curiosity through Games + Play
Chair: Cary I. Staples - University of Tennessee
Experience game development technologies ability to transform the teaching and learning processes. Instead of merely computerizing existing course content, this session seeks to bring together developer/educators are embracing the affordances of the new gaming technology to radically re-envision the design of complex, effective learning environments as a place where students are no longer passive but rather active knowledge-builders, problem seekers, problem-identifiers, problem solvers and, eventually, agents of social change. Sitting at the intersection of technology and culture, this session will ask, “how can we create an environment that will engage students in knowledge production? How do we move from a transfer model, to a participatory model of education?”
Ancient Sculpture in Context 2: Reception
Chair: Anne Hrychuk Kontokosta - New York University
Chair: Peter D De Staebler - Pratt Institute
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Some of the most celebrated sculptures from antiquity, such as the infamous Fonseca Bust, come to us “ungrounded” (Marlow 2013), with no secure provenience and lacking meaningful parameters for interpretation beyond academic discussions of style, date, workmanship, or identification. Building on a thought-provoking discussion held at CAA in 2017 (“Ancient Sculpture in Context”), this session will continue to direct vital attention toward the analysis of Greek and Roman sculpture with known find-spots, investigating how a secure archaeological origin can influence modern interpretations. This year, we seek to expand the discourse to include a wider range of chronological periods and associated methods by focusing on the later reception of ancient sculpture. Through this, we endeavor to assess how contextualization can shift over time and how these realizations can illuminate and transform our understanding of the social, historical, and economic values of ancient sculpture. This session will strive to update and redefine how we employ the facts surrounding ancient sculpture in light of current and rapidly changing views on archaeological methods, looting, and connoisseurship. Our hope is that these topics will, in turn, influence the ways that we approach teaching, research, and publication. We solicit discussions of the reception of freestanding and architectural sculpture from both original and re-use display contexts. Proposals with inter- and multidisciplinary approaches are especially welcome, and we encourage topics that apply innovative theoretical perspectives to the interpretation of ancient sculpture and its antique and post-antique reception.
Anonymity in the Eighteenth Century
American Society for 18th Century Studies
Chair: Kee IL Choi
Chair: Sonia Coman - Columbia University
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
The entry on ‘anonymous’ in the Encyclopédie begins by defining the term, etymologically, as that which has no name or whose name is not known. This definition alone highlights the semantic richness of the anonymous as ontological and epistemological category. In the early modern period, the notion of anonymity co-existed and overlapped with those of pseudonymy and of sociopolitical and/ or sociocultural visibility or lack thereof. Issues of intentionality and authenticity further complicated the early modern understandings of the anonymous and its constellation of norms and practices.
The eighteenth century saw a creative tension between conservative self-effacement and an emerging authorial ambition, manifested in literature, the visual arts, and specific forms of cultural entrepreneurship such as the activities of artists’ workshops and of marchands-merciers. If we are to look at eighteenth-century visual and material culture broadly, we will quickly realize the extent to which anonymous artifacts, loosely defined, make up the fabric of it. And yet, art history privileges (re)known artists and works, relegating the un-named and those who had fallen into anonymity, as it were, to the periphery of research and intellectual inquiry. When we walk through our museums, we become aware that onymous artists and artifacts drive featured narratives, while the majority of things we see on display are, in fact, anonymous. Against this backdrop, and given the resurgence of interest in material culture and the “decorative arts,” the eighteenth-century category of the anonymous warrants a fresh look.
Art, Architecture, and the Environment in the Ancient Mediterranean and Near East
Chair: Kristen Seaman - University of Oregon
Chair: Isabelle Pafford
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
This session explores the environment’s relationship with the art and architecture of the ancient Mediterranean and Near East. The environment has played an important role in how ancient art and architecture were produced, experienced, and reconstructed. Artworks and buildings were carefully situated within their environments, and they often incorporated natural elements within their aesthetic experiences. At the same time, processes that enabled art-making such as forestry, mining, and quarrying changed the environment in ways that shape our response to the landscape even today. Destructions such as earthquakes and volcanoes also shaped the archaeological record and thus our knowledge of ancient art and architecture. Recent scholarship, including that relating to the interdisciplinary field of the Environmental Humanities, has helped to explore the relationship of culture and nature in the pre-modern world, indeed the study of the ancient Mediterranean and Near East has benefitted from such attention. This session invites papers that explore how makers, patrons, and viewers interacted with the ancient Mediterranean and Near Eastern environment, broadly defined. Papers may consider such questions as: How were art and architecture situated within physical environments? How was the environment depicted in art? How did the production of art and architecture impact and/or exploit the environment? How did viewers of art and visitors to sites interact with the environment? What were the associations among the environment, art, and constructions of identity? And how have ancient environments been imagined in film, television, and/or new media? We especially welcome theoretically informed and interdisciplinary papers.
Art and Artificial Intelligence
Chair: Johnny Alam
In 1931, Paul Valery wrote an essay in which he anticipated a major change in the very notion of art affected by modern changes in the fields of knowledge and power. Valery’s words inspired Walter Benjamin to write his canonical essay The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (1936) that considered how technology changed the nature of art production, its uses, and its reception. Extending Benjamin’s work to the 21st century, WJT Mitchell critically reflected upon artificial intelligence (AI) in The Work of Art in the Age of Biocybernetic Reproduction (2001). However, Mitchell only included examples of artworks that were created by humans. This panel seeks submissions which discuss how AI is changing our art world by elaborating on artworks or art-related processes (curating, auctioning, marketing, etc.) created by AI systems (Machine Learning, Natural Language Processing, Computer Vision, etc.). All proposals will be considered for a future publication.
Art and Empathy
Chair: Shannon M. Lieberman
In 2017, the Minneapolis Institute of Art opened the Center for Empathy and the Visual Arts, Devoted to exploring “how to spark and nurture empathy through the visual arts,” the center hopes that cultivating empathy through art will allow individuals and institutions to order to “contribute even more toward building a just and harmonious society.” This session seeks papers that consider how artists, curators, and art historians engender and elicit empathy in their work. Scholars are invited to submit papers addressing, but not limited to, the following questions: How might empathy engage with difference and function as a strategy that connects people in times of divisiveness? To what extent might empathy constitute a form of radical engagement and activism? What is the cost of such empathetic explorations, and what do they demand of artists, readers, writers, and viewers? How do we make, curate, and teach these works in the age of trigger warnings? What strategies are available for engendering empathetic responses to artwork from previous time periods, and what are the benefits and pitfalls of such an undertaking? Papers may address artwork, visual culture, exhibitions, and art historical writing and criticism in any medium and from any time period.
Art and Financial Bubbles
Chair: Maggie M. Cao - University of North Carolina at
From the Tulipmania in seventeenth-century Holland to the very recent Bitcoin frenzy, bubbles have become a defining feature of modern economic life. This session seeks to explore the financial bubble as a window into the intersection of art and economics. Such events generated a wealth of visual and material culture that took critical, documentary, and mundane forms: satirical prints, genre paintings, and performance art as well as ticker tape, trade cards, and money itself. As well, bubbles and their attendant vocabulary engage questions of economic uncertainty using a notably visual rhetoric. Mania and delusion, phenomena long associated with such events, recall mainstay concerns of artistic practice: spectacle, Illusionism, and deception. Liquidity—often understood as the underlying cause of financial bubbles—metaphorically evokes material qualities and transformations that are central to many artistic processes. This session seeks papers that examine art and material culture that emerges out of bubble culture or engages with financial risks and failures. Since financial bubbles always have global reverberations despite local or national origins, papers exploring all geographic contexts are welcome.
Art and Justice: New Pedagogical Approaches
Chair: Courtney Skipton Long
Chair: Risa Puleo
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Considering the intersections between visual culture and criminal justice, this panel seeks to address how scholars and artists can engage in questions of social justice and activism responsibly. As issues of policing, criminal justice, and mass incarceration reach unprecedented heights around the world, this panel foregrounds papers offering insights into how we as art historians, artists, critics, museum curators, and educators might intervene to affect change. What methodological and pedagogical shifts to our practices do we need to make in order to ensure that historical inequalities and prejudices are not replicated when engaging in issues of social justice and activism? How should we reflect on our positions within the academy, the museum, or the studio to dismantle internalized personal and disciplinary biases as a means to activate the frameworks of our disciplines to contribute different perspectives in the production of a new social landscape? What critical terms need to be established when art engages social justice? And, when do we fail in our attempts at activism? This interdisciplinary panel seeks to foster a conversation about visual culture and criminal justice to explore the various ways in which policing, prisons, prisoners, mass incarceration, and their visual and material culture have been represented, portrayed, studied, displayed, and collected. Papers presented by practitioners in all arenas of the arts will address how art historians, artists, critics, museum curators, and educators have consciously reframed their practices to encourage reflection, support dialogue, and respond to changes in judicial systems and social activism across time.
In a royal decree dated 1564, King Philip II of Spain ordered his viceroys in the Americas to “safely bring to the realms gold, silver and cochineal,” an order that heralded profound changes in the global economy and art world. These materials arrived via Spain’s far-reaching trade networks, which by the 1550s extended to Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, Patagonia, the Yucatan Peninsula, and Chesapeake Bay, as well as throughout mainland Europe. The arrival of ships loaded with rich finds such as indigo, cochineal, brazilwood, silver, pearls, and emeralds into European ports presaged innovative artistic developments. New pigments, types of wood, and other unusual materials such as shells and feathers immediately and forever altered the landscape of European art, giving artists and patrons new and varied material choices. How did these finds, the result of European imperialism, impact global artistic developments? How does attention to materiality change understanding of aesthetics? What are the most useful frameworks for theorizing these developments, exchanges, and networks? While this panel investigates the prima materia, the very materiality of objects, it also moves beyond aesthetics to technical processes, trade and global exchange, as well as to the multiple societies where these works were created and collected. We welcome various approaches, from research inspired by conservation science or archival documentation to decolonial methodologies, material semiotics, Renaissance futurism, or thinking through the anthropocene.
Art and Politics: Just a gesture and no future? Debating the political force of public art in the US and Germany from the 1960s until today
Chair: Sarah Hegenbart
Chair: Michael Diers
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
The utopian force of the 1960s still resonates in the art of our time. Political ideas featuring prominently in the art of the 1960s, such as a critique of capitalism, feminism, Black Power, student and anti-war movements, are reemerging in contemporary arts in a time of re-emerging populism. This raises the question of whether the protest art of the 1960s succeeded in implementing the standards it demanded. Considering recent protest movements that utilise artistic strategies, such as #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo, as well as the phenomena of recurring racism and neo-fascist tendencies, there is reason to suspect that not much has changed since the 1960s. If this is indeed the case, does public protest art really possess the impact to change our political reality? Or does the recurrence of these phenomena, fought by protest art of the 1960s, indicate a crisis of the interrelation between art and politics? This panel is particularly keen on exploring these questions against the backdrop of the transatlantic exchange between the US and Germany.
Looking at artists such as Christoph Büchel, Sam Durant, Theaster Gates, David Hammons, Jutta Koether and Martha Rosler, we aim to discuss to what extent the utopian ideas of the 1960s have become part of the political reality of our time. Or do we have to return to visions formulated back in the 1960s and continue to implement them? If so, what is art’s role in this process? Can art be genuinely political, or is political art nothing more than a gesture?
Art and Xerox in a Transnational Context
Chair: Susannah Gilbert
Chair: John Tain - Asia Art Archive
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
This panel examines the impact of xerography on the production and distribution of art and visual culture. Beginning in the 1960s, when the Xerox Corporation’s electrostatic copying technology made easy and instantaneous photographic reproduction widely available, photocopy and its potential for self-publication and distribution has greatly impacted artistic creation and circulation. For instance, much of the aesthetic of conceptual art would be inconceivable without it: one need only think of the “Xerox Book,” the exhibition as publication organized by Seth Siegelaub in 1968. However, xerography also proved important to very different artists working in performance, photography, mail art, and Xerox or Copy art itself, which peaked in the 1970s and 80s. While the significance of the technology for conceptual art has been discussed by Alexander Alberro in his Conceptual Art and the Politics of Publicity (2003), and its use by activists researched by Kate Eichhorn (Adjusted Margin: Xerography, Art, and Activism in the Late Twentieth Century, 2016), there exists no comprehensive international study. The panel aims to address this lack, and invites proposals that engage with the following questions: How did artists’ use of photocopy change over time and space, from the introduction of the first copying machines to their widespread availability in the 1980s? What are the historical specificities of the use of the photocopier in different regions or countries? Did artistic reproduction differ in any significant way between photocopy and other print techniques, such as the mimeograph? In what ways did photocopy intersect with photography and performance?
Art, Crime, and History
Chair: Gail Levin
This session will feature papers on topics from across a wide range of history that deal with specific art crimes, including documented thefts, forgeries, and attempts to cover up such crimes by individual thieves, art galleries, auction houses, and museums. Topics that might be explored include efforts to create fake provenance, false narratives, schemes to launder stolen art works, smuggled art works, efforts to hide stolen art, unsolved crimes, and how the market winks or looks the other way to facilitate crime. What national governments are taking action to stop art thefts? What programs are most effective? What are some of the stories of heroic art historians or curators that attempted to expose crimes and how have their efforts changed art history? What roles do insurance companies and conservators play in art crime? How are laws in some countries encouraging art crime? What constitutes criminal behavior by museums? Where do ethics and the law agree and differ on issues of art crime? How has art crime changed the history of art? Why do art historians omit teaching about crime? What can we do to stop art crime? This topic demands attention now.
Artistic Biography in Early Modern Europe
Renaissance Society of America
Chair: Babette Bohn
Chair: Jeffrey Chipps Smith
Email: B.BOHN@tcu.edu, firstname.lastname@example.org
Early biographies provide crucial primary sources for our knowledge of early modern artists throughout Europe. Inspired by Pliny the Elder, regional loyalties, gifted artists, influential patrons, and each other, biographers from the mid-sixteenth through the eighteenth century produced a staggering variety of biographical collections – varied in terms of their approaches, criteria, scope, and artistic interests. Such authors as Neudörfer, Vasari, Van Mander, Sandrart, Houbraken, Malvasia, Baldinucci, and Palomino, among many others, produced biographical compendia that have supplied modern scholars with first-hand information on thousands of artists. In recent years, a growing number of scholars have reexamined these texts, publishing edited and translated editions as well as critical studies. This session proposes to investigate some of the concerns that have arisen in these studies, including but not limited to: biographers’ differing methods and criteria; questions of reliability and intentional misrepresentation; the role and significance of anecdotes; the uses of ekphrasis; prejudices concerning women, foreigners, and specific artistic specializations; the reliance on primary sources; the influence of local literary and artistic traditions; and the narrative structure, critical vocabulary, and authorial goals employed. We welcome papers that deal with these broader issues about biographical practices and how these have shaped the study of early modern artists.
Below the Mason-Dixon Line: Artists and Historians Considering the South
Chair: Rachel E. Stephens - University of Alabama
From the eighteenth-century onward both domestic and international artists have turned their attention to sites and scenes of the American South. Artists sought commissions from wealthy southern individuals, celebrated the landscape, and exposed elements of southern society. In the years before the Civil War, southern art tended to glorify the plantation lifestyle and its planter class while striving to maintain the social order. Stereotypes initiated during the antebellum period continued unabated post-war, taking on new social currency as white citizens strove to maintain their pre-war position. Many of these continue in subtle and not-so-surreptitious forms today. Given the current cultural climate, a diverse range of artists work to subvert some aspects of past southern art, leading to an awakening of the South as a globalized entity. This session invites papers by both artists and scholars whose work investigates the rich history of the American South while mapping a way forward. Papers considering any medium, including fine arts and photography as well as folk art or outsider art and mixed-media will be considered.
Beyond Copyright: Pushing at the Art/Law Collision
Chair: Winnie Wong - University of California
Chair: Peter J. Karol - New England Law | Boston
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
The art/law intersection has long been studied through the lenses of copyright, moral rights and traditional contract sales doctrines. This has resulted in a powerful yet object-focused literature on ownership and authorship, the intellectualization of property, the boundaries of originality, attribution and fakes, and the dangers of influence and appropriation. In the 21st century, however, the incredible expansiveness of artistic practices has provoked a far wider variety of legal contestations. Recently, a plethora of questions have emerged in the intersections of factory-style artist workshops and trademark law, authenticity in an age of licensing, the status of the art object and new media reproductions, and property and publicity rights. These new conundra require examining aspects of artistic culture beyond that of the practice of artists themselves, bringing in new and highly charged legal claims over selling, collecting, exhibiting, preserving, and historicizing works. What are the new critical test cases and boundary questions in the often unpredictable collision of artistic culture and legal regimes? How do jurisdictional variations impact global art practices? How do these new interdisciplinary art/law intersections speak to artistic practices in contemporary culture more generally? What theoretical boundaries are revealed by the new fissures in art and the law? This panel invites contributors to join a distinguished panel of art historians and legal scholars to take stock of recent developments in art and law beyond copying and copyright.
Beyond the Mirror: Specularity and Its Uses
International Association of Word and Image Studies
Chair: Véronique Plesch - Colby College
This panel aims at exploring the forms and functions of specularity in art and culture. Particular interest will be given to research that looks beyond the mirror as an iconographic motif or metaphor (or as the indispensable artistic tool for the production of self-portraits). For instance, how do mirrors function within a work’s spatial setup? As a point of entry into the work, mirrors can break the picture plane--no longer merely a window that opens away from the viewer but a device encompassing the spectator’s space, inserting her into the illusionistic construction. Topics to be addressed might comprise (inter alia): mirrors and reflections as either revealing—such as in the tradition of the Speculum as a tool and space of self-contemplation--or misleading (e.g. mirrors and their use in architecture, non-flat mirrors, and mirrors used in anamorphoses). Related themes include: mirrors as a connecting device between the space of the representation and that of the viewer and texts in which the relationship between representation and specularity is addressed and negotiated.
Beyond “Thoughts and Prayers”: Gun Violence, Activism, and Controversy in Contemporary Art
Chair: Annie Dell’Aria - Miami University
In the wake of the mass shooting at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida in February 2018, the Hirshhorn Museum in Washington, D.C. postponed a scheduled restaging of Krzysztof Wodiczko’s 1988 projection, a work that features two hands flanking a row of microphones: one holding a candle, the other a pointed pistol. Though originally created in the context of the 1988 presidential election, the work’s resonance with anti-gun control politicians’ common refrain, “thoughts and prayers,” and the federally-funded museum’s decision to delay the projection illuminate both the significance of contemporary art in this critical cultural dialogue around gun violence and the ways art institutions and markets are implicated in the same economic networks that prop up the gun industry and derail policy change. This panel invites submissions from scholars, artists, and curators that examine the relationship between art and the epidemic of gun violence in the United States. Potential topics include (but are not limited to): analyses of contemporary public and gallery-based artists dealing with gun violence, such as Felix Gonzalez-Torres, Hank Willis Thomas, and others; critical re-evaluations of historical artworks involving guns, such as Niki de Saint Phalle’s Shooting Picture series or Chris Burden’s performance Shoot (1971); studies of temporary and permanent memorials to mass shootings; and critiques of the interconnectedness of the gun industry, art philanthropy, and the art market. Through dialogue between art practice and history, this panel hopes to generate new frameworks for activism and dialogue around the crisis of gun violence in many communities.
Bitcoins, Artcoins, Blockchains, Art and Art History
Art Historians of Southern California
Chair: Walter J. Meyer - Santa Monica College
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Over the last 5 years, there has been hype about the impending “blockchain revolution.” Utopian and dystopian thinking alike characterize these emergent technologies across society and we seek to facilitate conversations specific to the disciplines of art, aesthetics and history.
Possible topics might include: using blockchains for provenance, authentication of digital works as well as certificates of ownership, art that is about block chains and artists discussing bitcoins and block chains as subjects not using block chains themselves, art and artists that utilizes blockchain technology, use of cryptocurrencies for acquisition and subsequent effect on art marketplace.
What will blockchains mean for artists, scholars and professionals and how might they affect our disciplines? This panel seeks submissions which engage and theorize the ways in which the study of art, art history and visual culture will be affected by the challenges and opportunities these new systems of exchange bring.
Blackness, Care, Love
Chair: Rael J. Salley - Maryland Institute College of Art
Chair: LeRonn Brooks
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Blackness, care, and love in art. Initially, it may make sense to separate the terms: Blackness describes a state of being and a theoretical lens useable for situating relations of the social, not necessarily sensations, emotions or aesthetics. The category of “the black” may even be discordant to the creative or artistic. It might conflict with ideas of “the human,” if seeing and caring requires an exchange involving social recognition, subjecthood, or perhaps even love. But maybe love is just what “blackness” needs. “Love” offers both recognition and legitimation. When one is loved, the lover bestows an ongoing judgment—that the beloved should exist. In visual practices, artists examine desires and judgments with discernible intent. But there are shadows around notions of care and images of love—who has the authority to say whether a love relation is real or a fantasy (Berlant 2012)? Legacies of oppression make this question as much political as psychological, as much about subjectivity as about recurring signs, gestures and fantasies. If fantasies of blackness and gestures of love can be understood as processes, we may look at the ways in which process and substance are intimately connected and thereby outline politics of care. What are the mechanisms through which blackness, care, and love become encumbered by politics? Noting the dangers of mere performances of compassion and liberal senses of sentimentality and care, both of which abound in contemporary media, we ask: What expressions of care are best suited for seeing blackness and love together?
Blue Black: Color and Abstraction in the Contemporary Moment
Chair: Alessandra Raengo - Georgia State University
Chair: Lauren Cramer
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Part of a renewed interest in the concept of abstraction within a critique of the demands of realism and a reassessment of traditional historiography on the Black Arts Movement, Modernism, and color painting, Darby English’s book 1971: A Year in the Life of Color (2017) and Adrienne Edwards’s show Blackness in Abstraction (2016) have brought attention to the relationship between abstraction and the “artifactuality” of color—the tension between “color’s racial connotations and its aesthetics meanings” (English). Similarly, shows such as Gray Matters at the Wexner Center (2017), and Glenn Ligon’s Blue Black (2017) further explore the materiality and the mediality of the monochrome. Yet, whether black is a color, as Raymond Saunders polemically stated in 1967, is still an open question, regardless of whether this question is explored through or as space, as in David Hammons’s Concerto in Black and Blue (2002), which harnessed what Noam Elcott describes as “artificial darkness”— or whether “black” is a condition best investigated through its effects: as Edwards asks, “what does it mean to black an object and what is it that a black object does?” This panel seeks to intervene in a conversation that has not yet resolved whether color might be racially innocent, whether abstraction might offer effective tools for progressive politics, and whether the theatricality of the colored object should be pursued or rejected. Thus, it invites contributions that address the “color theory” implicit in contemporary scholarship, artistic, and curatorial practices invested in the complex relationship between blackness and abstraction.
Bon Anniversaire, Monsieur Courbet!
Chair: Petra T. D. Chu - Seton Hall University
Chair: Mary Morton - National Gallery of Art
On June 19, 2019, we will celebrate the 200th birthday of Gustave Courbet (1819-1877). We’ll remember how, during his 58-year lifespan, the artist rose from total obscurity to international fame and notoriety, both for his artistic achievements, his sansculottist political stance, and his brazen public persona that made him one of the most talked-about and caricatured men in France.
Since his death in 1877, hundreds of books and thousands of articles have been written about Courbet and each generation has put its own spin on his persona and his work. Notwithstanding, he remains something of an enigma. Many questions are still open about the artist’s paintings, the extent and shape of his oeuvre, his technique, his artistic personality, his political agenda, and his place in the history of art.
Since the flurry of scholarly activity that surrounded the monographic Courbet exhibition of 2008 in the Grand Palais and the Metropolitan Museum of Art, there has been something of a lull in Courbet research. Taking advantage of the bicentennial of the artist’s birth, the organizers of this session invite papers that offer fresh perspectives on Courbet and his work. New methodologies are encouraged; papers on all aspects of Courbet’s work and his artistic persona will be considered.
Bridging Visual Histories: Sculpture and Photography in the Arts of Africa
Chair: Giulia Paoletti - Metropolitan Museum of Art
Chair: Sandrine G.M. Colard
Chair: Yaelle Biro
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
In the literature on the arts of Africa, sculptural traditions and photographic images are most often discussed as two separate fields of enquiry with distinct methodologies, aesthetics, and materialities. However, since the late 1970s, pioneering studies have revealed fruitful connections between these two media and their intertwined histories both in Africa and the West. Research has focused on the visible points of connection between these art forms by investigating the transpositions of sculptural traditions to the photographic image—from Yoruba portraiture and ibeji cults (Sprague 1978, Oguibe 1996) to Akan funerary practices (Wendl 2001). Critical scholarship has also unpacked ways in which photographs by Euro-American modernists have contributed to a lasting aestheticized approach of African sculpture (Grossman 2009, Strother 2013). More recently, orality, given its centrality in African cultures, has become an avenue of research in African photography, mixing physicality with immateriality (Küster and Pacquet eds. 2017). This panel seeks to deepen these important contributions, and expand the inquiry to other analysis bridging the histories of African sculpture and photography. How did photographic images overlap, replace or build onto the aesthetics of sculptural practices, whether earlier or contemporary? Have posing sessions in the photographic studio replicated postures commonly expressed in historical sculptures, or have their performative nature borrowed elements from African arts’ long traditions of performance? How relevant are historical forms in the photographic practice of contemporary artists? Lastly, how has the symbiotic relation between these two media contributed to shaping the field and the understanding of these traditions?
Building the Box of Useful Things: Contemporary Art and
Design History Society
Chair: Timothy Stott - Dublin Institute of Technology
Chair: Lisa Godson - National College of Art and Design, Dublin
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
This panel explores how design-historical concepts have been mobilised within contemporary art (c.1945 to present). Recent analyses have tended to identify ‘crossovers’ between art and design by focussing on how artists integrate their work with design practice to supersede art’s techniques of production and display or to disenchant art and re-engage with the social domain. However, few commentators have considered how arts practitioners (artists and curators) have historicised and legitimated their attempts to put art to use within discourses established in the history of design, principally concerning utility and function, but also taste, labour relations, style, and codes of consumption. In such cases, arts practitioners often put design history to creative use or misuse, challenge or misunderstand (whether wilfully or not) its disciplinary protocols and narratives and take an integrative or fantastic approach to the development of design problems and their logics. In return, correlating contemporary art to design history has allowed these same practitioners to turn outward, to think and practice environmentally, in the social interest, or across cultural distinctions and hierarchies.
We invite paper proposals in various subjects areas, including but not limited to:
- Environmental art and design.
- Information design and the cognitive arts.
- The return to making, craft, and decoration.
- The social turn.
- Experimental pedagogies.
- The invocation of key figures within design history, such as Ruskin, Loos, or the Constructivists.
Business of Contemporary Art in the Demise of Small or
Chair: Kyunghee Pyun - Fashion Institute of Technology
Between 2015 and 2017, 46 small or mid-size galleries, reputable in the field, went out of business in New York while demand for contemporary work has risen five-fold since 2000. Despite growth in the total amount of sales, only 25 artists are responsible for almost half of all postwar and contemporary art auction sales. In 2017, work by this small group of elite artists sold for a combined $1.2 billion—44.6 percent of the $2.7 billion total generated by all contemporary public auction sales worldwide.
People like Robert Cenedella, a professor at the Art Students League of New York, accused major museums such as the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Museum of Modern Art of conspiracy to control art markets, domestic and international, by promoting artists, very few, whose works they own in the collection. If the artists gain more recognition as pioneer who made an impact on contemporary art as is argued in scholarly essays for a special exhibition, the total value of the institutions’ holdings would be increased.
Papers in this session discuss issues such as changing conditions of primary and secondary markets; demise of small or mid-size galleries; rise of public art; growing business expenses; choices made by artists as alternatives to a gallery system; amending a standard gallery contract; transformation of an artist’s careers; monopoly of few giant galleries; demographic changes of collectors; and other crucial perspectives.
Artists, gallerists, art consultants, or scholars of contemporary art are welcome to submit an abstract.
CAA 2nd Annual Panel on Artists’ Space Making Initiatives
Chair: Michele Gambetta - ArtCondo
New York City’s history of creating buildings and spaces for artists has taken many turns the last 150 years -- from Carnegie Hall to Westbeth to the Dorothy Ross Friedman Residence created by the Actors Fund to ABC No Rio’s new building, BronxBricks, and the ArtCondo building in the South Bronx -- a variety of initiatives have been used to create artists’ spaces, and lessons have been learned from both successes and failures.
Most recently, in 2018, the New York City Department of Cultural Affairs and the New York City Economic Development Corporation launched two new and exciting efforts to build affordable artists living and workspaces. The Affordable Real Estate for Artists (AREA) initiative will be working with nonprofits to develop and operate affordable artist workspaces in new City-led development projects and kick-starting more exciting and diverse possibilities in support of housing NYC’s art workers.
These new initiatives are a major step in the City’s efforts to maintain its reputation as a place with active working artists who contribute to the vitality of the boroughs.
This panel discussion will review selected projects, generate a dialogue directed to the very real challenges artists face, and consider ways to create and maintain additional spaces for working artists in the City.
Ceramics and the Global Turn
Chair: Meghen Jones - NYS College of Ceramics at
Ubiquitous across world cultures, the medium of ceramics is intrinsically global. Well documented is the movement of ceramic objects, materials, and styles that traversed the Silk Road since its inception over 2000 years ago. For centuries, consumers in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa treasured Chinese porcelain for its beauty, status, and even poison detection. Later, Euro-American art potters found design inspiration in ceramics from a myriad of global sources. Contemporary ceramic art and design discourse is enmeshed in globalization, from individual potters’ cultural appropriation of value systems to industrial production outsourcing. At the same time, recent discourses of folk pottery and anachronistic studio pottery have tended to promote localism and insularity. What does the global turn mean for ceramic history and theory? How do interdisciplinary perspectives suggest new models for this medium-specific research? This session will consider ceramics and globalization from the early modern period to the present, focusing on ideologies, production systems, and networks of exchange. The study of the global flows of ceramics—as art, craft, and design—provides vivid access to currents of culture from the distant past to the present era of mass economic, social, and cultural globalization.
Chemical Printing and Drawing on Stone: Changing Perspectives on Lithography
Chair: Christine Giviskos
Chair: Elizabeth M. Rudy
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
From its first experimentations to its contemporary practice today, the technique of lithography has undergone a complex and rich evolution. Sweeping histories of the medium, such as the recent exhibition at the Zimmerli Art Museum, Set in Stone: Lithography in Paris, 1815-1900, have showcased the medium’s wide-ranging diversity and its persistent potential for innovative avenues of scholarly inquiry. This session seeks to highlight new research into the technical maneuvers by both artists and printers in the lithographic workshop, and encourages studies that range from lithography’s introduction through the present day and across the globe. Possible paper topics might include the key roles played by printers in lithography’s rapid development as a medium for artistic prints during the nineteenth century; collaborative relationships shared between artists and their printers; short-lived technical experiments such as “stone paper;” the consumer market for lithography historically and today; and the transformative introduction of the offset process.
Climate Change and British Art
Historians of British Art
Chair: Jongwoo Jeremy Kim - University of Louisville
They say Britons obsess over the weather. Alexander Cozens, John Constable, and J. M. W. Turner certainly ruined any prospect of ever dislodging British visual legacy from meteorology. Yet, this centuries-old visual history of grappling with humankind’s relationship with nature seems unprecedentedly urgent at a time when climate change denial has become a tremendous political force affecting national and local elections. In response to the current global environmental crisis, Britain’s 2005 Turner Prize winner Simon Starling rode an electric bicycle through the Spanish desert. His vehicle burned no fossil fuels and produced no smoke. Instead, the contraption collected water. With the water sourced from this punishing human labor, Starling made a watercolor of a cactus like a Regency botanist. Similarly, the Liberate Tate group’s protest performances against the oil giant BP’s corporate sponsorship of art institutions remind us that our historical consciousness must reflect recent developments in art-based environmental activism. Spurred by artists like Starling and works like License to Spill, 2010 (“a miniature oil spill at the Tate’s summer gala”), the Historians of British Art invites papers that examine the relationship between climate change, sustainability, the Anthropocene, and British art on a global scale. Papers that draw on critical debates about art and the politics of ecology, representations of ecological vulnerability and resilience, and contemporary visuality responding to climate change and the global economy are particularly welcome. “British Art” is broadly defined to include works by artists who actively engage in decolonization in the former British colonies.
Coexistence in Contemporary Art
Chair: Amanda Boetzkes - University of Guelph
Chair: Christine Ross
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
This panel will consider how forms of coexistence have become integral to artistic practice in the past decade. Whether the global refugee crisis, the unfolding of decolonization, the environmental coevolution between species, or the intensification of media that “cognize” without humans (Hayles, 2017), coexistence has become a privileged aesthetic terrain by which to address some of the major challenges of the 21st century. We might think of Ai Weiwei’s 2017 documentary Human Flow, which charts the global movement of refugees alongside the proliferation of borders and walls. We might also think of the main exhibition theme The Parliament of Bodies at Documenta 14, which gathered artworks that perform or interpellate agents in states of collective assembly and disassembly.
Art’s concern for coexistence pursues epistemological and ontological differences, material affordance and recalcitrance, political deadlocks and economic collapse as sites of experiential opening. Does this signal the rise of alternative distributions of sense and knowledge, as Bruno Latour would have it? Or is the enactment of coexistence a gesture constituted by the very possibility (or even probability) of failure by virtue of the existing conditions into which it is performed, as per Judith Butler’s formulation? What are the terms by which the imperatives of coexistence anticipate or usher in the emergence of social forms and their perceptual orientations? Of particular interest to this panel is the question of emergent aesthetics: as art becomes the site at which coexistence is thought, sensed and imagined, it generates unprecedented affective, perceptual, cognitive and
Collaborations in and out of the Classroom: New Ideas and Interdisciplinary Approaches
Community College Professors of Art and Art History
Chair: Susan M. Altman - Middlesex County College
In both Studio and Art History classrooms, faculty have reached out beyond their disciplines to work on innovative collaborations that expand traditional pedagogy. Collaborations can occur among related or unrelated studio disciplines, between art history and the studio, with disciplines outside the arts, and with industry, educational institutions, the public, galleries and museums. The most fruitful collaborations go far beyond group work for assignments. What new ideas can we bring to collaborative learning? How can our collaborations make for better students? What new ways can we engage students in the 21st Century? In what unique collaborations are you involved at your institution?
This session will bring together panelists to share “best practices” and present innovative ideas for collaborations to support student learning in both art history and studio courses.
Proposals for this session can come from many different courses: Studio, Art History, Art Appreciation, or Online Studio or Art History Courses. The session is 1.5 hours and is sponsored by the Community College Professors of Art and Art History. Proposals from 2 and 4-year institutions are welcome. Abstracts should be no longer than 250 words.
Coloring Print: Reproducing Race Through Material, Process,
Association of Print Scholars
Chair: Christina Michelon - University of Minnesota - Twin Cities
This panel seeks to investigate the racialized dimensions of print and printmaking. The medium has played a central role in the ideological founding of “race” and its hierarchies through visual representation. However, print’s materials, processes, and the language we use to describe them interface with conceptions of race in ways that require further study. For example, the term “stereotype” originated in the printing trade but has since evolved to mean an oversimplified general idea, often with pejorative racial connotations; the invention of chromolithography in the nineteenth century offered a more nuanced way of representing skin tones but simultaneously enabled the increased circulation of racist imagery; the rabid appreciation and collection of Japanese prints in the West altered artistic production globally while idealizing Eastern cultures; anthropological sketches and watercolor studies of native peoples were routinely translated to print, widely reproduced, and used as tools of imperialism and colonialism. Contemporary artists have responded to these historical issues: for instance, Glenn Ligon used the trope of a fugitive slave ad in his Runaways series (1993). Inviting papers related to these and other case studies, this session will consider how print and its study has implicitly upheld, revised, or challenged social constructions of race (including whiteness). This panel is geographically and chronologically open and will put mass images, fine prints, and bibliography from all periods in conversation to understand the medium’s material relationship to race on a global, transhistorical scale.
Commemorating the Deceased, Celebrating the Living: Monumental Funerary Architecture in the World of Islam
Chair: Onur Ozturk - Columbia College Chicago
“Woe to the nations before you who worshiped the tombs of
It is extremely clear that Prophet Muhammad was particularly concerned with his tomb becoming a shrine of Islam. He was clearly against the commemoration of the dead with elaborate structures and had insisted that he be buried directly in the earth with only a simple winding sheet (kafan). The rapid expansion of the Islamic faith into regions with many historical buildings dedicated to the deceased and the embracement of the religion by various groups with strong funerary traditions, however, resulted as the construction of numerous funerary monuments. Abbasids, Samanids, Mongols, Seljuks, Mughals, Ottomans and others embraced monumentality particularly for the tombs of ruling family members and well-respected spiritual leaders, and adopted the custom of visiting the graves to venerate the memory of the deceased. In many cases, strong social, cultural, historical and political motivations were in play especially since honorification of the dead usually shaped the future of the ruling family. Designed as the final resting places of leading political and religious leaders, such structures also served as the dynastic monuments emphasizing the continuity of the state and the legitimacy of the rulership. This session seeks submissions that address the complex nature of funerary monuments in the world of Islam with detailed discussions of their cultural, social, historical and political contexts, patronage structures and perceptions of viewers.
Chair: Adair Rounthwaite
Chair: Milena Tomic
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
The communist world acts as a key prop in Clement Greenberg’s classic 1939 definition of kitsch, in the form of the kitsch-loving “Russian peasant” and the totalitarian government that debases culture to the level of the masses. Since that dismissal, more nuanced perspectives on the status of kitsch under communism emerged in the former East. Czech-born Milan Kundera’s 1982 novel The Unbearable Lightness of Being involves a central character at war against the kitsch of Czechoslovak communist culture, a kitsch which Kundera links to the denial of doubt, irony, and death. Serbian art historian Miško Šuvaković identifies kitsch as a critical tactic in alternatives to Western postmodern art from Central Europe and the Balkans. For Šuvakovic, kitsch in that region alternately expressed hope for a transcendent leap between the everyday and the singularity of art and diagnosed the limit of politics as such. Chinese art historian and critic Gao Minglu allies the term “double kitsch” to Chinese contemporary art that stages Pop-like collisions of global consumerist icons and central figures from communist propaganda. This session invites papers on histories and theories of kitsch in all communist and formerly communist contexts. We are particularly interested in papers that probe kitsch’s problematization of the boundaries between criticality and complacency; that explore the reception and use of kitsch found in contexts where mass production was decoupled from capitalist accumulation; and that make fresh connections between kitsch and extant narratives of modern and postmodern art.
Constructing Criticality in Digital Art History
Chair: Anne Goodyear
Chair: Pamela M. Fletcher - Bowdoin College
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
With the introduction of digital methods into the history of art, numerous new strategies have emerged for doing art history digitally. Recognizing the concerns that some scholars have justifiably raised about the social, economic, and even political implications, or biases that may be embedded in the software and hardware on which such new techniques rely, this session seeks to explore what it means to do digital art history critically. At the same time, it contemplates what may be critical about sensitively adopting computational techniques to explore topics previously resistant to art historical analysis, such as markets, shifting view sheds in evolving built environments, and what it means to traverse spaces according to particular patterns. This session, then, explores the development of new art historical endeavors rendered possible through digital means. What information may be rendered accessible, and what remains or becomes unavailable for analysis in the digital era? Can we speak of a methodology or of an ethics yet? We encourage submissions that focus on projects that have brought new visibility to understudied topics and that interrogate tools employed or developed to conduct a digital history of art. Far from privileging a technophilic stance, this panel seeks to encourage the thoughtful examination of digitally informed approaches to the creation of new scholarship and even new theoretical inquiry.
Contemporary Art and Petrocultures of the Middle East
Chair: Samine Tabatabaei - McGill University
Oil and energy have a pervasive influence on contemporary experience in the Middle East. In some petrocultures, local economies and socio-cultural life have been nourished by the oil boom, which has facilitated mobility and participation in global trade. In others, the negative derivatives of oil, such as Islamicist ideologies and radicalism, have prevailed. Ubiquitous environmental devastation in the region – the driving force of the Anthropocene – and the never-ending wars in the Middle East are consequences of the battle over energy infrastructures. At the same time, in the creative sphere, a major shift is occurring with the consolidation of translocal art museums and universities under the confluence of oil and energy. Despite oil’s significant role in the economy and socio-cultural life, involvement with art projects that harness a sense of intervention in petroculture or directly engage with the substance of oil itself has recently come under scrutiny.The axial theme of this panel is examining and extending narratives, poetics, metaphors, and imaginaries of oil and energy comprising a confluence of orientalism, colonialism, postcolonialism, war, migration, precarious labor, mobility, materiality, plasticity, representation, preservation, climate change, cultural sabotage, criticism of petrocapitalism, and art and the Anthropocene. Drawing from critical theories around oil and energy, this panel invites participants to consider the role of oil and energy in shaping contemporary art’s social, cultural and political life in the Middle East. Please send 250-word abstracts and CV to Samine Tabatabaei to samine.tabatabaei (at) gmail.com by 2018.
Contemporary Chinese Presence in Southern Africa: Agency, Process and Petit Récits
Chair: Ruth Simbao - Rhodes University, South Africa
Contemporary relationships between China and Africa are critically important to international economics and politics, and they mark the shrinking of northern socio-economic as well as epistemological dominance. Positioned within the reorientations that are being led and enacted by global south scholars, artists and activists, this panel challenges the broad, top-down and northern-driven discourse of “China-Africa” often espoused in the media, and examines the ways in which artists engage with the radically shifting urbanscapes and socio-economic platforms that China’s relationship with the African continent offers. Contextualized against the backdrop of broader African responses to Chinese presence on the continent, this panel pays particular attention to artists (African and Chinese) creating works in Southern Africa. In what ways can the visual arts shift the economically driven discourse that simplistically positions China as either a “curse” or a “cure”? How can this new area of research in the arts engender a meaningful shift from African and Chinese people being objects of a discourse to being active subjects within a discourse? What small narratives are being told by artists, and how does the texture of these narratives challenge prevalent perceptions and stereotypes? How do these artworks operate within southern epistemologies that position the global south not as a uniform territory, but as a contingent, strategic and at times contradictory happening and place-as-process?
Contemporary Latinx Art
Chair: Nadiah Rivera Fellah
In recent years there has been a rising interest in contemporary Latinx art without a focused forum for emerging scholarship in the field. Most assessments position the topic in an awkward liminal space between art of the United States and Latin America. This panel invites scholars who are interested in critically examining, re-historicizing, and proposing alternative discourses to mainstream modernisms with regards to Latino/a art across media and disciplines. How are issues of race, gender, class, labor, and politics increasingly at stake for Latino/a artists? In what ways do artists probe or perform facets of identity, or put forth alternative and resistant narratives of being? How has the Trump era re-organized the very conditions of viewing Latino/a art, highlighting visualizations of socio-political resistance? Proposals dealing with the following, or similar, issues are welcome: borders, boundaries, migrations, exile; transnational/ hemispheric networks of exchange; artworks as critical sites of resistance; translations; the artist as activist; political work visualized through innovative aesthetic forms, modes, and practices; issues of authenticity and/ or interstitial positionalities with regards to identity, national origin, or artistic media; mining of archives (personal or institutional) and historiographic re-considerations of past events, exhibitions or materials. Preference will be given to papers that push the confines of disciplinary boundaries. Submissions from artists, curators, critics, and scholars are all welcome.
Contested Site: the Female Body in Contemporary Art
Chair: Katya Grokhovsky
Historically, the female body has been consistently depicted through the lenz of the male gaze and patriarchal heteronormative desire. In the era of “me too”, “time’s up” and “not surprised”, the female body must no longer be divested of it’s agency through art. However, how do we approach the subject, which has populated art history for centuries, without full censorship and the worldwide closing of the encyclopedic museums? How do we move forward? The current climate raises issues of policing of creative cultural output, bringing fourth crucial ideas and debate. Has it become an untouchable subject? Can only women depict women? Should we now paint, photograph and sculpt nude objectified passive men for the next 100 years in order to correct the balance? Four speakers, including artists and curators, will discuss their relationship to the female body in contemporary art practice, through presentation of challenging and critical thought and dialogue. The goal of this panel is to define challenges and future trajectory of contemporary art practice, as it pertains to the subject matter of the female body.
Controversial Historical Murals on Campus: Placement, Dialogue, and the Freedom of Expression
Chair: Cynthia K. Bland - University of Wisconsin Stout
Chair: Heather Stecklein
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
What is the best course of action to take when a historical work of art on campus draws fierce criticism for its controversial content? Indiana University Bloomington owns a Thomas Hart Benton mural that depicts a Ku Klux Klan rally with hooded Klansmen and a burning cross. Two Cal Peters WPA paintings at the University of Wisconsin-Stout portray First Nations inhabitants in a stereotypical romanticized manner, where they embody a subservient role to white colonizers. The University of Kentucky recently reversed the draping of its controversial mural by Ann Rice O’Hanlon that shows a Native American with a tomahawk, and black slaves planting tobacco and playing music for white dancers. These Public Works Project paintings are historically significant and artistically valuable, yet present a whitewashed, dominant cultural perspective. What place should these culturally biased pieces take on campuses that strive for inclusive excellence and intercultural development? Do the paintings reinforce damaging stereotypes? Can these works of art create a hostile learning environment? Is it possible for interpretive materials to mitigate offensive narratives and encourage open dialogues, or should controversial works be relocated to mediated spaces or removed altogether? Could a counter-narrative display effectively communicate more contemporary cultural perspectives? These difficult issues can cause clear divisions between those who argue for the removal of the material that perpetuates culturally dominant voices and those who strongly advocate for freedom of expression. Campuses should encourage discussions and displays that mitigate these concerns effectively.
Creativity: (Re)Defining The Possible
Chair: Louisa McDonald - University of Nevada at Las Vegas
Chair: Takeshi Okada
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Creativity, defined by the Finnish management scholar, Alf Rehn (2009), as “the name we give to that moment of change which redefines what is possible,” emerged as a focus of international academic attention and a key issue of economic policy in the late 1990s along with the recognition of the value of the “creative industries,” and Richard Florida’s “creative class” (2002) Once exclusively the concern of the Fine Arts, Creativity has become central to the understanding of contemporary global economies. Along with Genius and Inspiration – each a highly valued, if imperfectly understood concepts - Creativity has since the ‘90s generated two decades of theoretical academic research and amassed vast quantities of data aimed at identifying its sources, in order to harness, foster and possibly teach it - with little consensus or confirmed success. This panel (re)starts the conversation and focuses on how the understanding of Creativity has evolved in a climate of increasing globalization and access to the internet and social media. Practicing artists, studio artist/educators, art historians, art educators, and psychologists of art discuss the state of Creativity since the revolution in e-interconnectivity and the emergence of the “creative commons”? Has anything changed? Should practice still inform theory, or have the roles reversed? What happens (or doesn’t) today in the studio, the classroom, the laboratory, the kitchen? Is there a difference between virtual and “real” experience? What effect does instant access to the artistic creativity of others have on one’s own artistic Inspiration? Is any of this important?
Cross-purposes or cross-pollination: the art library in the
Art Libraries Society of North America
Chair: Kathleen E. Salomon - Getty Research Institute
As colleges and universities invest in a variety of programs geared toward the digital humanities and digital art history, the library is often a partner, opening its doors to create and support labs and makerspaces, providing students and faculty with the tools for innovation and spaces for collaboration. Similarly, specialized art research libraries and institutes outside the academy are considering the impact and integration of evolving digital research methods on their programs and spaces as they move further into the 21st century. Proposals over past years by some academic and research institutions seeking to move traditional art library print resources to centralized and often remote locations in favor of increasing spaces for technology have been highlighted and argued in arts newsletters, blogs, petitions, and letters of support from eminent scholars and laypersons, demonstrating that what might be viewed by some as evolution is neither straightforward nor uncontroversial. As American art libraries continue to move away from onsite browsable book stacks, disagreements by researchers over this trend remain passionate and sometimes prevail, even while spaces for teamwork and technological innovation are at a premium. Discovery in the stacks is still seen by many as critical for research, particularly in institutions outside of the U.S., yet others argue that online research tools mitigate the treasured concept of serendipity. This panel seeks papers from art historians, students, and librarians regarding the intersection of traditional uses and innovative programming within art library spaces. Theoretical arguments as well as practical ideas and experience are encouraged.
Cultivating and Leveraging Diversity through University – Community Partnerships
Chair: Anne T S. Englot
Social theorist Scott Page describes in his recent book, The Diversity Bonus, the ways in which diverse groups addressing complex challenges yield ideas that are more creative and innovative than homogeneous groups working on the same challenges. Reaping that bonus is critically important for academic arts educators as we strive to produce work that resonates with our increasingly diverse communities, educate increasingly diverse student bodies, and inspire new generations of students to pursue arts careers—especially as our faculties tend not to be diverse. As Co-Directors of a social art space called Express Newark that was conceived as a partnership between Rutgers University – Newark and the Newark, NJ arts community, we strive to realize the diversity bonus through community-engaged programming and practice with over 27 local artists in residence alongside Rutgers–Newark arts faculty teaching printmaking, graphic design 3D printing, video production, photography, journalism, and five galleries of varying scales where the work of local artists is exhibited alongside internationally recognized artists.
Such community-engaged arts practice is not unique, instantiated in cities from Cambridge and Providence to Philadelphia and Baltimore to Milwaukee and Chicago to Houston to Richmond and beyond. We seek to stimulate discussion among arts educators practicing in such diverse environments to explore commonalities, share pedagogies and methodologies, and consider the replicability of such projects. To what degree are they uniquely place-based? To what degree can we identify best practices? How can we learn from them to yield the diversity bonus for ourselves, our students, and our communities?
Dada Studies as Countercultural Practice: Intervening in the Art Historical Institution
Chair: Brett M. Van Hoesen
Chair: Kathryn M. Floyd - Auburn University
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
What can the historical study of the radical tactics of Dada (and its influences) offer as its own kind of countercultural practice? What happens when research and teaching on anti-art, anti-institutional, interventionist, or deconstructionist strategies for interrogating power penetrate the established disciplinary spaces of art history, from university classrooms to scholarly publications, blockbuster exhibitions, archival collections, conference presentations, and the like? What challenges or opportunities have the tensions and alignments between Dada objects of study and institutional frameworks produced, from the earliest histories of Dada in the 1920s and 30s to the recent celebrations of the 100-year anniversary of Zurich’s Cabaret Voltaire? Taking as a springboard the unique interdisciplinary study and practice of Dada, Intermedia, and Fluxus art at the University of Iowa from the late 1960s to the present, this session seeks other cases of critical, countercultural, or interventionist analyses of international Dada’s objects, artists, events, concepts, legacies, and descendants. Given the growing “corporatization” of the university, the so-called “crisis” of the liberal arts, and increasing calls for curatorial and archival transparency, we also ask what potential Dada scholarship or art historical studies of countercultures might have for the discipline and its institutions. In the discursive spirit of Dada, this panel will be organized as a series of four or five short case studies or position papers, followed by guided questions and extended, open discussion among panelists and audience members.
Decolonizing the Web: Steps Towards Challenging the Limitations of Internet and Art Portal Discoverability
Chair: Constance Cortez - UT Rio Grande Valley
Chair: Karen M. Davalos
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
When researching images, scholars and the public are often challenged by discoverability of non-canonical artwork on the Internet and institution-based art platforms. Web searches often frustrate those investigating Latinx, African-American, Native-American, or Asian-American art. While complexities of identity contribute to problems of discovery, historically marginalized groups are also difficult to locate because conventional metadata and cataloging systems emerge from colonial cultural codes, European aesthetic traditions, and/or normative expectations about art practice. For example, none of the controlled vocabularies, including Getty Art and Architecture Thesaurus, can account for a “piñata,” although the word has entered the English lexicon. Given such circumstances, what of those having little or no knowledge of these fields? In the Southwest, public school educators have felt the urgency for discoverability intensify due to recent legislation mandating the integration of Latinx Studies into Public School curricula. Since it is common for teachers of social studies and history to illustrate eras or issues via imagery, they too depend upon the accessibility of artworks.
This session seeks papers from all art-related fields that have been marginalized by mainstream databases, art portals, and the Internet. Contributors engaged in the challenges of discovery for non-canonical artwork might address the following:
- The integration of specialized vocabulary into existing platforms
- The creation and maintenance of a thematic or culture-specific platform
- Linkage and finessing metadata with other institutions
- Dealing with larger/national institutions that just don’t “get it”
- Problems specific to Public School usage of platforms
Design and/as Cultural History
Chair: Peter Fox
Chair: Eric G Anderson
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
By the end of the nineteenth century, the Enlightenment idea of culture as a universal index of human faculties was supplanted by a comparative impulse to distinguish groups of people by certain behaviors and values, what Raymond Geuss termed “culture in a horizontal sense.” In the wake of industrialization and fractious geopolitics, the fields of decorative art, industrial design––and interiors—generally understood today as aspects of “design”merged as crucial sites for negotiating conceptions of cultural identity in Europe. Attempts to absorb design into the critical and institutional matrices of fine art sparked debates about the continuity between nation and culture, between popular and elite, that have yet to be fully reckoned with. This panel will examine cultural history as a method, both in its past applications and its contemporary viability, for interpreting the reciprocity between design and modernity throughout the world. We invite contributions that situate design in relation to broader attempts to define and theorize culture since the nineteenth century. Possible avenues of inquiry include historiographic considerations of key figures like Jacob Burckhardt, the role of museums and exhibitions, changing forms of commerce and consumption, and the impact of mass media. Does the intellectual autonomy of design studies rely upon a particular understanding of culture? How might such an understanding inform the idea of a global design history?
Design History/Design Heritage
Chair: Rebecca D. Houze - Northern Illinois University
Chair: Grace Lees-Maffei - University of Hertfordshire
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
This panel invites papers that examine the relationship between design history and heritage studies. At their intersection are questions of ownership and identity. How are sites and artifacts of cultural heritage claimed, defined, or constructed and to whom do they belong? How do we study intangible heritage, which is not located in objects or places, but rather in a worldview or a way of life? Whether tangible or intangible, heritage denotes something we inherit, a birthright provided to us through our inclusion in a given group, be it familial, national, ethnic, or by another marker of identity, such as the shared “world” heritage designated by UNESCO. Diverse, wide-ranging examples of designed heritage include maps, guidebooks, illustrated encyclopedias; archives, databanks, digital resources; museums and exhibitions; architecture and landscape; furnishings, dress, and other aspects of material culture; performances, pageants, and rituals. Related to these topics are also activities that address heritage, for example, through legislation and international charters; preservation and conservation; cultural appropriation, looting, and repatriation. Definitions of heritage are tied to different, and competing, political agenda and ideologies. While some approaches to heritage are influenced by an academic Marxist-inspired “history from below,” of public engagement, public history, and social and cultural history, others derive from the heritage “industry,” a sub-branch of the tourist industry. In examining the interfaces of design and heritage therefore, this panel welcomes studies of design heritage from diverse points of view, methodological approaches, time periods, and cultural contexts.
Design Incubation Colloquium 5.2: CAA Conference 2019 New York City
Chair: Robin Landa
Chair: Elizabeth DeLuna
Presentations of original Communication Design research, including significant creative works, the practice of design, case studies, contemporary practices, and the scholarly review of design projects. New approaches to design education and pedagogy will also be discussed.
We invite designers—practitioners and educators—to submit abstracts of design research. Presentations are limited to 6 minutes, preferably Pecha Kucha style. A moderated discussion of the research will follow.
Deskilling in the Age of Donald Trump
Chair: Christopher Matthew Reeves - University of
The artist’s strategy of deskilling, at its noblest, is a move that Claire Bishop writes, “is less preoccupied with conceptual maneuvers than with generating in the beholder the desire to make and do.” This desire, as the 2016 election of Donald Trump in the United States makes explicit, reveals the precariousness of such a proposal. With disciplinary reorientation - long a tenet of deskilling’s possibility – tethered to Trump’s willful and dangerous ignorance of capable governance, how might we justify, differentiate, and continue to valorize works of art or practices that find themselves ideologically aligned with a new mainstream form of deskilling that has become a disconcerting political aesthetic? This panel welcomes art historians, artists, curators, theorists, and others seeking to investigate how deskilling – on the internet, performance art, D.I.Y., conceptual arts – might be understood in this moment, where the artisanal is both demanded and denied, where the beholder’s desire to make and do might be romantic but also mandated.
Does Art History Need Aesthetics?
Chair: Thierry de Duve - Hunter College
In the last fifty years, the discipline of art history has opened itself to a number of methodologies, theoretical paradigms, and ideological viewpoints imported from other disciplines—from semiotics to anthropology, from poststructuralism to deconstruction, from Marxism to psychoanalysis, from feminism to queer theory, from iconology to narratology, from social science to cultural studies—which have considerably enriched its discourse. One would think that philosophical aesthetics and its companion-discipline, art theory, would be foundational with respect to art history. However, these are the two disciplines which, as a rule, have not yet been integrated into the art historian’s toolbox and are rarely taught at art history departments. Why is that so? Should that remain the norm? Should it change? The panel I propose is destined to gather opinions on this issue and to start a conversation.
Ecocritical Approaches to Colonial Art History (1600-1900)
Chair: C.C. McKee - Northwestern University
Chair: Claudia Swan - Northwestern University
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
A great deal of recent art historical scholarship on the colonial world addresses the visual production of natural science and its relationship to ecology. Scholars have pinpointed botanical, entomological, natural historical, and ethnographical imagery as crucial to understanding and classifying the natural world, beginning with New World colonization and intensified maritime trade in the fourteenth century. Increasing contact with non-European cultures resulted in a flood of new plants, animals, minerals, and artefacts into Europe from across the globe. European exploration and settlement subordinated (often violently) autochthonous knowledge of the natural world developed by indigenous peoples, slaves, and their descendants—in the East and West Indies as well as the Middle East and Asia, cultures with which Europe had long fostered contact. Visual representations of colonial ecologies proved to be a foundational means by which Europeans understood their increasingly interconnected world and asserted dominance over people, land, and resources.
This panel asks: In what ways do art historical approaches informed, for example, by ecocriticism and new materialism, open on to new ways of understanding visual byproducts of colonialism? In what ways can a more capacious attention to colonial ecologies contribute to our understanding and analysis of the visual production of the non-European world? How did these ecologies shape the representation of Europe in return? This panel seeks proposals that examine the roles of science, art, and/or environmental policy in an ecological approach to colonial art history, garden history, and visual histories of science.
Ecology as Intersectionality: Aesthetic Approaches to
Chair: T. J. Demos - University of California, Santa Cruz - Director, Center for Creative Ecologies
Chair: Emily Eliza Scott - History of Art and Architecture & Environmental Studies, University of Oregon
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
A surge of recent art has engaged ecology in newly complex ways, including by confronting environmental injustice and violence in aesthetically provocative ways. Moving beyond topical approaches to environmentalism, and indebted to the field political ecology, this panel focuses on practices—artistic, visual-cultural, and curatorial—that express ecology as a mode of intersectionality, insisting on the inseparability between environmental matters of concern and sociopolitical and economic frameworks. Intersectionality, emerging from the black feminist legal theory of Kimberlé Crenshaw, and underscored within decolonial struggles, refuses to divide overlapping systems of oppression (e.g., tied to race, class, gender, sexuality) and thereby challenges the essentialization of one or another term in isolation. Here, ecology functions too as a site of indissoluble relationality that highlights, and indeed is constituted by, interaction, or even intra-action (in the sense posited by Karen Barad, whose theory rejects the separateness and purity of originary categories). Just as carbon pollution materializes differential sociopolitical impacts, economic inequality produces unequal vulnerabilities to environmental injustices. With the siloing of issues, we risk epistemic violence, including white environmentalism, green capitalism, climate change denialism, and anthropocentrism. This panel invites papers that present innovative readings of diverse case-studies from art and visual culture by exploring and developing methods of ecology-as-intersectionality, wherein ecological politics conjoin with indigenous and/or queer rights activism and/or movements against police brutality, media censorship, and capitalist extraction. We aim to foreground experimental interpretive methods that address art at the hinge of politics and environmentalism.
Empires of Pleasure across Eighteenth-Century Cultures
Chair: Dipti Khera - New York University
Chair: Meredith S. Martin - New York University
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Now one of art history’s most vibrant subfields, the eighteenth century has played a key role in the discipline’s global turn and in re-thinking conventional histories of art, empire and Orientalism. By tracing the increased circulation of people and objects in different parts of the world, scholars working on this period have highlighted new conceptions of knowledge, aesthetics, power and sociability. Furthermore, they have ensured that formerly devalued concepts tied to eighteenth-century practices and patrons – among them luxury, pleasure, leisure, femininity, sensuality, wonder, hybridity, and consumption – be taken seriously. Yet while the physical exchanges of eighteenth-century artworks, peoples, and things from around the globe has been the subject of recent scholarly inquiry, less attention has been paid to conceptual affinities – notably a mutual emphasis on pleasure and decline – that existed between disparate geographical and cultural locales. For instance, how might we enrich or complicate the story of eighteenth-century art and culture by putting Indian or Chinese paintings of palace gardens in dialogue with French fêtes galantes? Our contention is that these kinds of global comparisons will not only yield a richer formal and conceptual understanding of each type of artwork, but will also enable us to ask larger theoretical and methodological questions related to the common grounds they share. By examining how intertwined histories of pleasure and power were mediated across local, trans-regional, or intercultural contexts, we hope also to contribute to scholarly debates beyond art history and to encourage new research projects and teaching agendas.
Ethics in Design: Critical Perspectives
Chair: Andrew DeRosa
Chair: Laura S Scherling
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Design professionals and educators and have long been able to influence culture, persuade audiences, and are in a position to be able to impart a sense of social responsibility while practicing and teaching their craft. Historically, the field of design has closely evolved with the latest developments in art, media, and technology. In recent years, advances in digital technologies, as well as changes in the environment and global economy, have led to a rapid transformation in these related areas of design. In light of these transformations, design educators and professionals are not only required to stay connected to relevant epistemologies and changes in education, but are also faced with emerging ethical considerations.
Design is frequently aligned with commercial practices and servicing the interests of businesses. These motivations can be at odds with designers’ abilities to apply their problem solving skills to social good. The tightly woven relationship between commerce and design presents challenging ethical decisions. Thus, it is important to address the issues that designers face in terms of theory, practice, pedagogy, and social responsibility. Design is a “world-making/shaping” process, and design ethics influence our notions of freedom and equality, respect, and intimacy in societies undergoing profound changes (Bewert, 2017). Today, ethics regarding consumption, sustainability, privacy and surveillance, user manipulation, and cultural appropriation have come into sharp purview. This panel will explore the timely and unresolved ethical issues in the field of design. Through this discourse, we seek to further uncover these issues and address solutions.
Exclusion/Isolation: Solitude in the Nineteenth Century
Chair: Alexandra L. Courtois de Viçose
Human mobility increased tremendously during the nineteenth century, a phenomenon still investigated in insightful studies of resultant cultural exchanges. Being in a new place can also make one feel like a fish out of water, however. Isolation became a locus of artistic exploration for many individuals who were, either voluntarily or involuntarily, at a distance from the familiar.
Distance, literal and metaphorical, was actually something many artists sought and desired. Artists in expanding, bustling cities often wanted to distance themselves from the surrounding modernity; they retreated into dream worlds or literally to other parts of the world isolated from economic and cultural centers. Distance was also imposed on many through exile, forced migration and economic upheaval – and at a time when gender, race, or different abilities could provoke someone’s exclusion from cultural institutions even in their birthplace.
Solitude can be welcome, or dreaded. It can also be a source of creative freedom. Sought after or imposed, how does solitude foster creative energy? How can exclusion stimulate artistic innovation? How do artists make the experience of isolation, for themselves or their subjects, visible?
Alexandra Courtois (firstname.lastname@example.org) and Caty Telfair invite proposals (250 words) considering various aspects of the themes of isolation and exclusion in the nineteenth century:
- Idealization of artistic isolation
- Valorization of the individual
- Space of creation/studio
- Exclusion from the normative
- Institutional exclusions
- Creation in the private/domestic sphere
- Political/economic/national isolation
Facing Death in Global Modernity, 1600-1900
Chair: Camille Mathieu - University of Exeter, UK
Chair: Kristopher Kersey - University of Richmond
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
The specter, threat, and image of death were powerful agents in the coalescence of global modernity. How and to what ends did artists put a face on a topic and a process they knew nothing of? What does it mean to confront death, visually? How were images used to find commensurability between distinct notions of the afterlife? This session will examine in depth the imagery of death itself: as a concrete figure, inevitable reality, process, or outcome.
This panel seeks papers that will scrutinize the intercultural or anachronic dimensions of the visual culture of mortality. Topics may include familiar subjects, such as death masks, mortuary icons in Buddhism, and photographs of the deceased, as well as more violent and visceral topics such as revolutionary propaganda prints, colonial imagery describing the mortal consequences of attacking colonizers, the economy of relics, and the circulation of lynching photography in the American South.
This session invites papers with both a multi-national and a local scope in order to address the visualization of death in a period of unprecedented global contact. We are especially interested in the role of new visual technologies (as well as appropriated and revived technologies) in effecting, documenting, or transcending the violence of death at the margins of early modernities.
Fair Use Versus the Gatekeepers
Chair: Jo-Ann Morgan - Western Illinois University
According to Section 107b of the Copyright Act, “Fair use is a legal doctrine that promotes freedom of expression by permitting the unlicensed use of copyright-protected works in certain circumstances.” Circumstances might include “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research.” In theory, to promote freedom of expression art historians can use copyrighted artwork unlicensed. Why then do museums and copyright holders demand fees and licenses from scholars? Availability of visual text shapes art scholarship. An art historian asked a museum to use a Charles Alston painting in a publication. The museum’s fee for a digital image was $100 plus two copies of the book ($140 each). Before releasing it they required proof of copyright permission, another $90. At $470, Alston had to be omitted. Because the academic publisher had generously contracted for 66 illustrations, fees tallied into double-digit thousands. If this economic gatekeeping persists, only well-heeled museums and corporate sponsors will produce well-illustrated books. Another art historian was excited to find work by a little-known artist in a museum collection. Unfortunately, the museum would not provide an image without copyright permission from the recently deceased artist’s estate, an elusive quest. The little-known artist remained so. This session will address rising fees and limited availability of visual text. If scholars cannot afford nor get access to visual material when publishing new scholarship on recent art wont that leave scholarship the purview of museums and corporate sponsors with a stake in advancing their own collections and the status quo?
Fascisms Past in Contemporary Artistic and Curatorial Practice
Chair: Miriam S. Paeslack - European Architectural History Network (EAHN)
In a recent op-ed piece for the New York Times secretary of state Madeleine Albright warned that we are in an era today in which “fascism — and the tendencies that lead toward fascism — pose a more serious threat … than at any time since the end of World War II.” With this as backdrop, this panel asks how contemporary artists and curators tackle the cultural expressions of German and Italian Fascism of the 1920s through 40s as a mode of critique. Recent artistic projects, art historical research and exhibitions frame fascist art and architecture in new and thought-provoking ways. Artists born in post-war Germany, for example, have discovered as subject matter Italy’s rationalist architecture, a medley of modernist and explicitly fascio-classicist forms. Jeffrey Schnapp, Diane Ghirardo, and Vanessa Rocco have discussed the central role and manipulative potential of spatial and architectural settings in Mussolini’s Italy; and Paul Jaskot explored the deep impact of the German Nazi perpetrators’ policies and practices on cultural production of artists and architects. Germano Celant organized Post Zang Tumb Tuuum. Art Life Politics: Italia 1918-1943 at the Prada Foundation in Milan, which rejects presenting art of that era chronologically to instead reconstruct ground-breaking exhibitions of that era. Visual and architectural historians, curators and artists are encouraged to submit proposals that both discuss contemporary artistic or curatorial work that critically frames Italian and/or German Fascism, and address the theoretical underpinnings of these projects and how they present both critical narratives and discourses of Fascism today.
Chair: Johanna Amos
From the purple, white, and green sashes of the suffragettes to the pink pussy hats of the Women’s March, the extravagant Zoot suit of Black and Chicano youth to the elegance of the Congolese sapeurs, fashion has long been used as a visual and material form of resistance. This session explores fashion as a form of resistance, and in particular queries how dress and self-fashioning have been utilized to challenge or negotiate gender norms, racial discrimination, political/colonial control, or corporate interests historically and into the present. It further questions whether fashion, as “capitalism’s favorite child,” can ever be a pure form of resistance. While the term “fashion” has traditionally been associated with Western designer goods, this session views fashion as an intentional process employed by individuals at all levels of society and across all regions of the globe.
Feminist Matters, 1968 and Beyond
Committee on Women in the Arts
Chair: Sampada Aranke - San Francisco Art Institute
This year marks the 50th anniversary of the year 1968, best known adoringly as the “year of global insurrection” by historians, activists, and students of the decade. This year, also not-coincedentally, was transformational in the art world as artists reconceptualized what it meant to make work, what counted as work, and what the limits of object-making meant for artwork. Lucy Lippard and John Chandler famously encapsulated these considerations in their 1968 invocation of art’s dematerialization. At the same time, Lippard and other Art Workers doubled down on the deeply material labor of artistic practice, calling for equitable work conditions, meaningful wages, and access to resources and recognition from major cultural institutions. These kinds of practices were of course national and global in scope, as artists demanded political, economic, and representational power within cultural storehouses, while also producing work that shifted the conceptual, material, and affective language of art-making in the 20th century. How might we think about this tension between the material and im/dematerial as an ongoing feminist aesthetic concern? In what ways does the commitment to valuing artistic labor while at once producing work that challenged, if not eviscerated the idea of value itself point us to a site of feminist potential? How do these various histories embody, anticipate, and even foreclose contemporary feminist praxes? This panel aims to account for a feminist politics of aesthetics in 1968’s wake in order to account for all its contemporary intersectional, conceptual, material, and political possibilities.
Footholds of Figural Art: Cross-Cultural Approaches to Stance and Standing
Chair: Emmelyn Butterfield-Rosen - Williams Graduate Program in the History of Art
Chair: Tamar Mayer
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
When European theorists in the late nineteenth century attempted to define a unified tradition of “European art” stretching back over centuries, their definitions—to a striking degree—revolved around human stance, and the foot in particular. Since Aristotle, the unique organization of the human’s mamalian body has been a touchstone of Western philosophy. As emphasized in On the Parts of Animals, the human, as the only animal to stand erect, has the largest feet in proportion to the body; it is also the animal most in need of rest from standing, with a body not designed to stand over long periods. The techniques Western artists deployed to emphasize this dimension of human corporeality, and the contact of feet with the ground, have been a preoccupation of European art history. At the same time, in non-Western art, feet and the manipulation of the body in relation to them, have taken up different aesthetic and philosophical values. Art history has long accounted for divergent structures of pictorial illusionism through questions of composition and perspective. A comparative discussion focused on figural stance is uniquely capable of revealing reciprocities between formal techniques and culturally specific conceptualizations of the human. This panel seeks to examine theoretical and practical approaches to stance in figural art from a broad range of periods and geographical regions. We invite speakers whose work addresses (but is not limited to) questions like: formal treatments and metaphorical meanings of feet in art, the strain of standing, pictorial illusions of weight, and the like.
Foucault and Art History
Chair: Catherine M. Soussloff - University of British Columbia
Beginning around 1970, the impact of Michel Foucault’s philosophy on the discipline of art history has been seen in renewed and transformed attitudes to questions of the subject, subjectivity, and identity; in new approaches to the genres of landscape and portraiture; in reassessments of the meaning of the archive for art historical studies; and in an increasing interest in vision, visuality, and visibility. However, little attention to Foucault’s impact on the overall direction and shape of the contemporary discipline of art history has occurred, despite the changes to it brought about, in part, through Foucault’s influence on “the new art history” in the 1970s, multiculturalism in the 1980s, visual and cultural studies in the 1990s, and the status of Contemporary art in the 2000s. This session seeks to map the contours of what such a historiography would consist by interrogating the assumptions made of and in art history, regarding its methods of description and analysis, its approaches to its objects of study and material culture, and the extent of its investments in cultural and political theory. The session hopes to put these topics in conversation with historiographical matters specific to art history and of interest to Foucault, among them: the significance of the social history of art in the 21st century; the interaction(s) between art history and other disciplines regarding media specificities and image studies in the long 20th century; the place of continental philosophy, particularly phenomenology, in the historiography of art since c. 1970; the significance of modernity, etc.
Found objects, sculpture and the (post)industrial city
Chair: Natasha Adamou - Kingston University London
Ever since Marcel Duchamp concocted his ‘readymades’ in the early twentieth century, the majority of the critical literature on artworks that comprise readymade and found objects hinges on the commodity status of these items and the critique of consumer culture. This session, instead, invites papers that explore the links between found object based sculpture and its relationship to the economies and technologies of production in industrial and postindustrial metropolitan areas -- as Anne Wagner has argued, the history of sculpture is in constant dialogue with the history of technologies of production. From the dominance of industrial zones in early twentieth-century modern cities around the world to the waning of industry and the emergence of service-based economies and the growth of the financial sectors in postindustrial, postmodern urban areas, this panel explores how artistic practices that incorporate found objects negotiate the shifting texture of cities on the level of the street, the neighborhood, the workplace, the local store, real estate and urban life. This panel encourages the participation of art historians, curators, museum professionals, artists and theorists whose work and scholarship encompass the study of material objects, readymades, found objects, and simulated everyday objects in modern and contemporary sculpture and explore its links to obsolete and emerging technologies and sites of production in the context of industrial and postindustrial cities worldwide.
French Seventeenth-Century Painting - New Thoughts
Chair: Anne Bertrand-Dewsnap - Marist College
This session solicits papers addressing any aspect of seventeenth-century French painting, a rich topic but difficult to grasp as a whole because of its apparent lack of stylistic and iconographical cohesion. In the last ten years, new monographs and exhibitions on specific painters (such as Nicolas Poussin, the Le Nain brothers and Valentin de Boulogne, to cite only a few) have provided invaluable new research but as a side effect tend to isolate these painters from their place in the broader context of the so-called “Golden Age” of French seventeenth-century painting. This session seeks papers presenting new research on specific painters and/or proposing new approaches in understanding and defining French seventeenth-century painting as a whole. For instance, papers addressing some of the following issues are welcome: the importance of artistic centers outside of Paris and their relationship with the art of the capital; how the different types of patronage (the monarchy, the wealthy bourgeoisie, the middle class) have shaped French seventeenth-century style; while the relationship between France and Italy is well-known, what interactions existed between French painters and other neighboring countries, such as Flanders, Spain and Germany?
Frenemies: Unlikely Cultural Exchange in the Pre- and Early Modern World
Chair: Noa Turel - University of Alabama at Birmingham
Chair: Russell Kelty - Art Gallery of South Australia
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Cultural exchange is often hailed as a marker of modern tolerance. Historically, however, the movement of ideas, objects, and customs around the globe has rarely been correlated with a cultivation of cultural sensitivity or inclusivity. In the late Middle Ages, for instance, while the kings of France and England were devising plans to revive the crusades in an attempt to block the rapid expansion of the Islamic empires, their subjects were trading in prized “Saracen” cushions and the most popular medical treatise was Avicenna’s Cannon of Medicine ( al-Qānūn fī al-Ṭibb). Similarly, during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the appeal of Europeans was heightened by the Tokugawa shogunates’ attempts to control their perceived seditious influence. Having replaced the Portuguese with the Dutch, who “brought their trade and left their gods at home,” the shogunate sequestered them on a small artificial island off limits to the vast majority of the Japanese population. Nonetheless, the Dutchmen’s knowledge, particularly in medicine, painting, and printing, became highly valued by artists and scholars in eighteenth-century Edo. This session seeks to excavate instances of cultural exchange, adaptation, and appropriation between societies the relationships of which were characterized by antipathy rather than mutual admiration. How and why did people cultivate appreciation for the culture of societies regarded as inferior, sinful, or menacing? We are particularly interested in papers focused on case studies of such unlikely exchange before c. 1800 that shed light on the intricacies of adaptation and the shaping of diverse material cultures around the globe.
From Monuments to Anti-Monuments of Contemporary Art in the Age of Globalization
Chair: Jung-Ah Woo - POSTECH
This panel will examine the dialectics and genealogy from monuments to anti-monuments of contemporary art in global context. Traditional monuments are heroic and self-aggrandizing icons that glorify communal solidarity and create a mythological version of the nation-state. By “anti-monument,” which is negative, ephemeral, self-effacing, and dispersed over time, this panel proposes an alternative notion for the problematic monuments of nation-building agenda. At the end of the twentieth century, when the romantic discourses of hybridity and nomadism were celebrated in tandem with globalization, artists began rebelling against the exclusive nationalism and offered a deeper understanding of the troubled nature of patriotism. After the incessant global military crises since the traumatic rupture of 9/11, however, the liberatory potential of the nomadic conditions was seriously undermined, and the grand failure of neo-liberalism has further reinforced nationalism and even jingoism within the spatial relations of capitalism. Anti-monuments, which deny the historical master narrative that solidifies established views of the collective past, provoke communication and interaction among the viewers to carry the burden of nationalized memory. This panel encourages papers from art historians, critics, and artists in the fields of anti-monuments to delve into the dialectics at work in the social, historical, and psychological processes of forming the identities of both the individual and the community, and propose a cautious reading of nationalism and patriotism.
Geographies and Art Histories: Diaspora, Decolonizing and Praxis
Chair: Andrew Gayed - York University
Chair: Chanda Laine Carey - New York University
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Diaspora and transnational identity pose many issues when it comes to imagining geography within global contemporary art practice. This discussion urgently accounts for the lived conditions of globalization and migration, and points to the difficulties of art history to adequately explain the realities of a networked and globalized world. In imagining the issues posed by geographic borders this panel grapples with the disciplinary limits of art history, suggesting that diasporic artists and their cultural production illustrate the incompatibility of colonial definitions of borders, nation-states, and identities. It is when geographies and borders are reimagined that the migration and movement of people can be developed productively and fully within art
By reimagining geography, what does decolonizing the study and writing of art history look like? What does it mean to conduct research on the global contemporary with special attention to spatial problems in a large scale? How can macro studies of global art histories productively be theorized alongside micro studies of specific locales? Where does the study of diaspora fit within world art studies and notions of ‘worlding’? How might methods of entangled geographies speak productively to themes of transnational connections and diaspora? Ultimately, how can geography be theorized within contemporary art both regionally and globally while avoiding the rigid nation-state epistemologies of area studies? Through case studies, curatorial and artistic interventions, and institutional practices, we encourage proposals that suggest methodologies for rethinking geography giving special attention to advancing studies of indigenous, diasporic, queer, and transnational theory within contemporary art.
Get Up, Stand Up: Contingent Faculty and the Future of Higher Education in the Visual Arts
Foundations in Art: Theory and Education
Chair: Naomi J. Falk - University of South Carolina
Chair: Richard J. Moninski - University of Wisconsin-Platteville
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Increasingly, tenure-track positions disappear, contingent faculty numbers swell, and those who are left standing teach more classes. Is this sustainable? What are the consequences? What recourse do adjuncts and non-tenure-eligible faculty have to attain fair wages, benefits, and some semblance of job security? What remedies exist nationally and locally? How do prevailing popular attitudes about higher education, particularly in the visual arts, affect this issue? What inspiration may be found in recent actions by public school teachers across the country? On a personal level, how do we, and our students, deal with the stress of increasing course loads and instability. How do we support each other? Successes and pitfalls will be discussed.
This session encourages open dialog. Submissions and ideas are sought from multiple perspectives, including adjuncts, graduate students, tenured faculty, administrators, union members, and others.
The study of fascism in art history has its roots in the (originally marginalized) interest of left art historians of the 1960s and 1970s in the topic of art in Italy and German under fascist regimes. Since then, while not exactly mainstream, the relationship of art to fascist politics and ideology has become an accepted topic. But what of the vast number of fascist and fascist-aligned regimes and parties beyond Italy and Germany? Fascist states and fascist factions have been active in a wide variety of contexts and for different reasons. Art and cultural policy have often been an important part of those political activities. Can we talk about a global art history of fascism?
This session calls for papers that address the broad range of fascist states, parties, and groups that have engaged in cultural debate and production. While also interested in proposals on Italian and German topics, we particularly encourage contributions from geographies and regimes not usually discussed in terms of fascist art and politics, from Argentina to Romania, from Japan to Brazil, from France to Finland. We also encourage proposals that engage comparative perspectives on fascism and art, preserving the particularity of different social and political contexts but nevertheless analyzing how art history can say something critical about a broader definition of fascism and culture. In addition, explorations of contemporary expressions of fascism and cultural production are also relevant.
Global Missions and Artistic Exchange in the Early Modern World
Chair: Katherine M McAllen - UTRGV
Chair: Cristina C. González - Oklahoma State University
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
The movement of missionaries in the Early Modern world played a key role in the circulation of art objects between (and within) the Americas, Asia, Africa, and Europe. While this session welcomes papers that document the spread of European art within a missionary context, we are also interested in the mission as a spiritual, architectural, and geographical space that allowed for the local interpretation, importation, and production of objects. Missions themselves sometimes became distribution centers in a global world. How did the interaction between European and non-European populations give rise to complex artistic relationships within the mission enterprise, and how can we understand missionary art and architecture both within a colonial and global history of art? Proposals that offer compelling case studies or emphasize unexplored geographies and circuits of exchange are encouraged, as are papers that theorize the study of art-and-mission and engage with the historiography and recent scholarship on the subject. While we especially welcome work on the Spanish and Portuguese empires in the Americas, Africa, and Asia, papers exploring the visual culture of Dutch, French, and British missions will also be considered.
Clara Bargellini is a Professor and Senior Research Fellow at the Instituto de Investigaciones Estéticas at UNAM in Mexico City. She is a preeminent scholar in the field of colonial Latin American art and mission art history. She has agreed to serve as discussant for this session and include reflections related to the exhibition she curated, The Arts of the Missions of Northern New Spain,
Go Public, Young Scholar
Chair: Amy B. Werbel - SUNY - FIT History of Art Department
Higher education, the humanities, and liberal arts are under attack in the United States, and many believe their survival will depend on scholars who can successfully reach outside “the ivory tower” and demonstrate the relevance of historical subjects to understanding contemporary issues. “Go Public, Young Scholar” will highlight opportunities, obstacles, and strategies for crafting and promoting public scholarship in the history of art. Papers are requested from scholars (at any career stage) who have made the leap outside the gates of academia and engaged broad audiences to understand contemporary issues through the lens of art, architecture, decorative arts, etc. from any geographical region, prior to World War II.
“Hands Up, Don’t Shoot!”: Bodies as Sites of Trauma in Contemporary Art
Chair: Monique Fowler-Paul Kerman -
Western Washington University
In Between the World and Me, Ta-Nehisi Coates explains that, “In America, it is traditional to destroy the black body—it is heritage,” (2015, p. 164). In recent years, this history has been thrown into relief by well-publicized instances of police violence, especially against African-American men, which has led to civil protests such as #BlackLivesMatter on social media and in the streets. Such expression of racial and class tensions has not been limited to US politics and social unrest. In the face of the worst global refugee crisis since World War II, politics have become increasingly polarized over various responses from world leaders. Opponents of immigration have led campaigns that criminalize asylum-seekers and economic migrants alike and decry their deleterious effects on job markets, health care systems, welfare programs, and national cultures. Images of migrants drowning and children bloodied or gassed, as well as the aftermath of terrorist attacks, have flooded the news and circulated social media. The relationship of economics, politics, and armed conflict in propagating violence and oppression is tragically visible in political discourse and world media.
How has art since 1960 envisioned the body as a site of trauma? This panel invites submissions that consider artistic responses to various forms of physical violence as well as forced movement, migration, labor, and containment. Possible topics include:
- Civil wars, genocide, and ethnic cleansing
- Police and military brutality
- Political protests and riots
- Slavery and human trafficking
- Violent acts of racism, sexism, and homophobia
- Acts of terrorism
Has anyone ever seen an image of war? Reassessing the visual culture of war and related disasters, violence, and torture in the modern and contemporary moment
Chair: Alexis L. Boylan - University of Connecticut
Chair: Matthew Baigell - Rutgers University Emertius
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
The title of this session is a play on scholar Arielle Azoulay’s provocation, “Has Anyone seen a photograph of a rape?” Azoulay argues that our visual culture (and most artists) simply refuse to see rape, but more far reaching arguments have been suggested by Slavoj Žižek and T.J. Demos, for example, that in fact our visual culture remains, with only a few exceptions, unable, inept, or blocked through the mechanisms of neo-liberalism and colonist history to see war or violence. This panel seeks to revisit these claims and unpack how the images of war that appear all around us that record historical events as well as imagined situations can, and do, provoke dialogue about the quality of war and its impact. Is there anything new to be seen in regard to war or do we see the same images over and over? Does reality or the documentary hold any meaning? Did it ever? Are there visual strategies to make war visible in spite of all the mechanisms that encourage non-sight? We are interested in papers that explore such images (from around 1800 to the present day) through a diversity of eye-witness, traditional art historical, theoretical, and digital accounts as well as the impact such images have on individuals and population groups.
Haunted: Cross-Historical and Cross-Cultural Specters in Print Practice
Chair: Katherine Dolores Anania - Villa I Tatti, Harvard’s Center for Italian Renaissance Studies
Chair: Alexis Salas
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
The portability of artists’ prints and printmaking projects (from comics to librettos, artists’ books to ‘zines) allows them to traverse borders and boundaries. But what remains attached to, and within, a print as it circulates, and how does it resurface, sometimes much later? An apprentice printmaker’s works, for instance, covertly or overtly bear the stamp of the master under whom she studies. A zine or broadsheet reveals layers of appropriation. Physical attributes like paper composition, or repurposed matrices or surfaces can also profoundly alter our readings of printed works. This panel, then, attends to an important but neglected aspect of prints’ mobility: it puts the ways that prints were fabricated and the stories of their local origins in dialogue with their histories of circulation. From practitioners and historians, we seek discussions of images, designs, and materials of various “others” that lie within a print’s construction.
Inspired by voices speaking to the ghostly residues upon objects from Gloria Anzaldúa to Jacques Derrida to Luce Irigaray, to Harold Bloom, we solicit proposals that approach the “haunting” of printed material in various ways. In addition to semantic or metaphorical hauntings, we welcome papers that consider pedagogical haunting—that is, the things that viewers of printed material are supposed to learn and how—or the ways that prints have contributed to the unsettling of certain cultural forms. The aim is to exhume and revive the mis-identifications that printed materials have instigated over time.
‘Her Public Voice’: Teen Girls and Young Women in Ancient Contexts
Chair: Barbara Mendoza - Santa Monica College
Revealing a person’s public voice in the ancient world is a largely uninvestigated topic. Often the study of women in art focuses on the representation of royal women or female deities; yet undoubtedly teen girls and young women existed and had a voice. Prior research on ‘children’ or ‘female sexuality’ in the art of the ancient world has already been discussed, but what of teen girls and/or young women do we know? Or can they tell us? What extant images do we have of them? What can these images tell us of their political, religious or public persona? For example, non-elite girls in ancient Egypt are sometimes represented in entertainment scenes of tomb paintings, either as dancing girls or servant girls. These are by far not the only contexts they appear in or appeared. Girls and young women played a large part in the advancement of skills and culture, such as making objects for their own use, playing a role in a deity’s cult, and the like. This panel seeks to explore the public voice of teen girls in ancient art, in form, content and context, as a critical approach to understanding their image in ancient art and culture. Scholars whose research focuses on pre-teen and/or teen girls, or young women from the ancient world (the ancient Near East, Europe, Asia, Africa and the Americas) that can give these girls and young women a public voice are encouraged to submit proposals to this panel.
Historic Libraries and the Historiography of Art
Chair: Jeanne-Marie Musto - Hofstra University
Historic libraries offer underutilized resources for understanding art history. This session explores the potential of such collections – whether intended explicitly for the study of art or not – to deepen and broaden our understanding of art historiography and its relationship to social, intellectual and geo-political currents. Libraries significant for these purposes include those of Count Leopoldo Cicognara and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, which survive largely intact, and others that survive partially or in inventory form, such as those of John Ruskin or Stanisław Kostka Potocki. Count Cicognara’s library, for example, offers a view of the history and geography of art available to scholars at a key moment for shifting geopolitical conceptualizations of his country and Europe as a whole. President of the Venetian Academy of Art when Venice shifted from Napoleonic French to Habsburg Austrian control, Cicognara wished his library to contribute to Italy’s ability to compete with other nations for greatness through cultural eminence. For him, as for scholars throughout post-Napoleonic Europe, study of artistic heritage and shaping a future nation went hand in hand. But his collection, like others of its day, reflects more than patriotism. It underlines his effort to define an inchoate discipline through a wide spectrum of printed materials, including ephemera. It also demonstrates his active participation in art historical debates and connections with artists and arts administrators in Italy and beyond. Papers that examine any aspect of the historiography of art in relation to this or to other historic libraries will be welcomed.
Hot And Bothered: Tackling Sexual Harassment and Assault in Higher Education
The Feminist Art Project
Chair: Anonda Bell
Chair: Connie Tell - The Feminist Art Project
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Attending or working in a place of higher learning comes with inherent dangers – 40% of female identified faculty and 30% of female identified staff experience sexual harassment, and one in five women are assaulted while attending college. How have artists, feminist scholars, and academics responded to this phenomenon? The Feminist Art Project seeks a wide array of proposals with possible topics to include: artists’ strategies for effective response; how gender stereotypes and representation fuel the phenomenon; how feminists can challenge and change a culture which normalizes harassment and toxic “rape culture”; the physiological effects of harassment; formal reporting strategies - does the system work; backlash and repercussions in the academy. Proposals with images are preferred for this panel.
Human-centered Design Research
Chair: Audrey Bennett - Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Today, there are a plethora of challenges in the world that deserve the attention and, more importantly, the expertise of designers. These global challenges tend to be complex in that they may traverse intellectual, ethnic, political, economic, gender, age, geographic, and other cultural boundaries and, thus, require input from different stakeholders. To address these cross-cultural complexities, the discipline of design provides research methods for collaboration along with technological resources that enable aesthetics to engender interaction between humans and things in unprecedented ways that have the potential to improve our wellbeing; but, may, at times, merely fumble our everyday experiences. We welcome papers that tout the successes and failures of human-centered design as well as those thatreport findings from collaborative research in academia and industry.As an open session, the intellectual scope will comprise an eclectic mix of topics that will range from design thinking, disruptive and intervention design, speculative design, decolonization,inclusive design, social justice, equity, universal design, human-computer interaction, urban design, generative design, meaningful play, systems thinking, sustainability, usability, social innovation, creativity, aesthetics, to visualization.
Humanism and Twentieth-Century Architecture
Society of Architectural Historians
Chair: Dale A. Gyure
“Humanism” has been a vital component of architecture for many of the leading figures of the last 150 years, but the true nature of its influence has yet to be determined. It first engaged modern architects through Geoffrey Scott’s version of nineteenth-century German empathy theory. Shortly after World War II humanism reemerged in Western culture in different guises; in architecture, Lewis Mumford promoted the Bay Region Style as a “humane” alternative to the functionally obsessed International Style while Rudolf Wittkower rejected mystical correlations between body and building to recast the Renaissance interest in proportions as a new type of symbolic form. At the same time, Corbusier crafted his Modulor system around the dimensions of the human body and Alvar Aalto proudly declared his architecture to be humanist. Critics like Vincent Scully and William Jordy offered competing explanations of the term while acknowledging its importance. During the Cold War, humanism became tied to the freedom of American democracy. Later in the century, humanism became a target for theorists like Peter Eisenman due to its association with what was viewed as a bankrupt modernist approach. Humanism’s centrality to twentieth-century architecture is indisputable, but the true nature of its impact is elusive: confusion lingers over what the concept actually meant and how it contributed to theoretical discourse. This session seeks to define and understand the various uses of “humanism” in architecture since the late-nineteenth century. Contributions from scholars in a wide variety of disciplinary and theoretical perspectives are welcomed.
Immigration and Inclusion in Art Museums
Association of Art Museum Curators
Chair: Christa Clarke - Newark Museum
Art museums in the United States, a nation populated by immigrants who settled on indigenous lands, historically played an important role in building citizenship through the formation of national identity. If art museums in the Progressive Era were geared toward assimilating mostly European immigrants, how do they respond today, with increasing public discourse around issues of immigration and inclusivity? In a moderated discussion linked to another panel session, museum curators focus on immigration in the American art museum, addressing questions such as: How has global immigration influenced permanent collections and exhibition programs? How have tensions between top-down/bottom-up perspectives been mapped onto spatial and collecting hierarchies in our museums? How might established collections be made to tell new stories or reflect on their incapacity to do so? Can we imagine revising narrative structures in our museums whereby settler colonials are recast as immigrants?
Impartial Integration: Decolonizing artistic and creative practices in Asia
Chair: Minna Valjakka
The current cosmopolitanism in artistic and creative practices around the globe advocates growing possibilities for interregional collaborations and solidarity. The innovative forms of “aesthetic cosmopolitanism” (Papastergiadis 2012) can facilitate further discourses on shared issues and their local significance. Yet the global allure of new collaborative practices may also result in a kind of provincialism where artists rely “on a generic set of creative solutions and a priori assumptions that are imposed indiscriminately onto each site of practice” (Kester 2011: 135). Building on the dialectical perceptions of empowering possibilities brought forward by cosmopolitanism and criticism expressed towards new forms of cultural colonialism, this panel explores how current artistic and creative practices in Asia, and related research, could be decolonized both in practice and in theory, and how this could lead towards more impartial integration. To critically re-examine what kind of socio-political, ideological, cultural or conceptual significance decolonization can have, we invite new methodological and theoretical approaches that renegotiate the existing trajectories and narratives of cosmopolitanism and cultural colonialism in artistic and creative practices. Topics to be addressed include but are not limited to: challenges and contingencies of transcultural art projects; novel spatial, formal and aesthetic strategies employed to reposition these practices for global audience; decentering the institutional power relations; reconstructing the relationship between local and global; examining new conceptual approaches extending beyond the conventional understandings of “cosmopolitanism,” “cultural colonialism”, and “decolonization.” Papers with interdisciplinary and intersectional approaches based on recent examples and/or empirical knowledge are especially welcome.
“In the Shadow of Forward Motion”: The Legacy of David Wojnarowicz
Chair: Mysoon Rizk - University of Toledo
Chair: Scott A. Sherer
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
The works and deeds of New York-based American artist David Wojnarowicz (1954-92) form a multifaceted record that provokes inquiry into the role of art in civil as well as uncivil society. What do his multifold practices — writing, photography, film, painting, sculpture, performance, activism — teach us about late twentieth and early twenty-first century culture?
How might the details of Wojnarowicz’s legacy clarify the transformative 1980s? This period played witness, at the start of the decade, to the rise and fall of an East Village Art scene and accelerated art world market, coinciding with the emergence of the AIDS pandemic and queer empowerment; and, by 1989, to a series of culture war clashes, principled litigation, social activism, and health care reform, as well as increased dedication to artistic freedom of expression poised against markedly decreased governmental support for the arts. What can we learn from this key witness, community ethicist, and icon of queer protest who compellingly embraced fluid amalgamations of subjectivity and creative possibility?
What posthumous factors and/or conditions continue shaping this legacy since his death nearly thirty years ago, whether such incidents as the 2010 Smithsonian censorship of A Fire in My Belly or the 2018 exhibition David Wojnarowicz: History Keeps Me Awake at Night, mounted by the Whitney Museum of American Art? How does Wojnarowicz continue to be instructive? We welcome papers addressing any aspect of the artist, and how he has served as case study for the age.
Indigenous Languages of the Americas and the Language of
Chair: Kristopher Tyler Driggers - University of Chicago
Chair: Allison Caplan
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Indigenous languages offer exciting new avenues and novel challenges for art history. This panel asks how we might integrate indigenous languages with the language of art history, considering how expressions of form and representation in Amerindian languages intersect and diverge from the discipline’s own practices and conventions of language. Language powerfully shapes the production, reception, and interpretation of objects. We thus propose exploring how indigenous languages can enrich our understanding of art in the moment of its creation and help us better engage with art in contemporary scholarship. This approach is not without its pitfalls and methodological challenges: historical and cultural particularities, including discrepancies between oral and written traditions, questions surrounding historical writing systems’ decipherment, and the colonial production of indigenous texts in alphabetic script, must be navigated carefully in working towards linguistically-engaged art histories of the Americas. In light of these particularities, this panel will encourage methodological reflection on the promises and challenges of using indigenous terminology in art history, as well as new case studies that demonstrate how indigenous language study can advance the interpretation of objects. Topics for consideration may include ekphrastic practices in indigenous traditions; issues of chronology (including using contemporary indigenous terms in the study of older art); areas of resonance between language and artistic production and technique; and points of congruence and incongruence between indigenous terms and those used in art historical practice. Papers will address traditions throughout the Americas, with emphasis on the pre-Conquest period.
International Copyright Flexibilities and Creative Practice
Committee on Intellectual Property
Chair: Anne Goodyear
How do copyright laws of countries other than the U.S. promote uses of copyrighted material in the context of creating art, criticism, scholarship, and other creative practices? This panel will focus on exceptions or flexibilities in national laws that may allow for such uses, such as quoting copyrighted material in the context of criticism. U.S. law specifically includes the doctrine of “fair use”, but to what extent do other nations allow for uses of copyrighted works that are comparable to uses that, in the United States, are regarded as “fair”? Might existing copyright flexibilities in various countries provide room for new modes of international collaboration and cooperation in sharing and developing new creative projects? What guidelines exist to aid users, including scholars, artists and other creators, particularly those who make work intended to traverse national borders, in navigating copyright regimes outside the U.S.? What relationships between “open access” initiatives and copyright exceptions might deserve further attention? This panel invites submissions that address these questions, focusing on the strategies of specific countries, such as “fair dealing” in the United Kingdom, or providing comparative analyses across borders.
Intervening Archives/Methodologies/Theories of Oceania
Pacific Art Association
Chair: Maggie Wander
In recent history, colonial interactions between Indigenous groups, explorers, settlers, migrants, and other colonial actors have produced a range of mobilities (either willful or compelled), yielding fraught processes of place-making, establishing new homes, and forming new social, cultural, and political positions in the face of constant dis-positioning. The historically- and culturally- specific conditions of transpacific movements demand new theoretical approaches to understanding cultural production in the Pacific. This panel questions the histories and constitution of collections and archives that form the basis of much visual and material studies research in Oceania. Because these are necessarily conditioned by contexts of (post)colonialism, diaspora, creolization, and borderlands, this panel asks: How can the Pacific rethink its archives, engage innovative research methods, and recognize epistemologies and historicities specific to its own colonial and socio-cultural experiences? Our framing of the archive is broadly understood as collections of documents, images, and objects. We are interested in expanding the archive to include local and multiple perspectives. Furthermore, we pursue thinkers whose work defies accepted national and cartographic boundaries to take into account migratory and cross-cultural experiences across oceans and continents. We are open to art historians, historians, anthropologists, artists, curators, and performers who question dominant narratives and representational strategies that perpetuate how one comes to “know” Oceania.
Japanese Material Culture In Ukiyo-E Art: Learning The Language Of Objects
Chair: Elena Varshavskaya - Rhode Island School of Design
For over two hundred years in the 17th - 19th centuries, life of Japan’s city dwellers had been captured, in its entirety, in ukiyo-e images. The illustrated themes encompass all kinds of real-life experiences of townspeople as well as every aspect of their inner world - their cultural and political interests, attitudes and opinions. Not concerned with creating an illusion of reality in their compositions, ukiyo-e artists attached much importance to the precise rendering of objects specific for every situation. The artists’ expertise spanned all kinds of artifacts – fashionable attire of contemporary beauties and historic court garments, samurai arms and armor, ships, boats, and means of land transportation, architecture and interior decor, fans, smoking pipes, tobacco pouches, toys, and so on and so forth. At times, objects in ukiyo-e meant more than the eye met. Often, they were communication tools involved in the intellectual exchange, in mind games based on associations, hints and puns. The vastness of the thematic scope of ukiyo-e art, its verve, together with the remarkably wide-ranging knowledge base of ukiyo-e artists, make ukiyo-e legacy an inexhaustible visual source of information on early modern Japan. The current session invites papers that investigate any aspect of material culture present in ukiyo-e. Welcome are contributions focusing on objects related to distinct activities, seasonal celebrations, historic or legendary events, etc. Encouraged are specific examples helping a more nuanced understanding of Japan’s cultural codes across temporal and national borders.
Land Art reconsidered: land use, water rights and
Chair: Leticia R. Bajuyo - Texas A&M University - Corpus Christi
Chair: Jason S. Brown
Email: Leticia.Bajuyo@tamucc.edu, email@example.com
Land Art or Earthworks gained attention in the 1960s and 1970s as artists used the natural landscape to create site-specific structures, art forms, and sculptures. In many respects, this work borrowed heavily from ancient cultures and civilizations that created art on a monumental scale in the landscape. Contemporary artists who work in the landscape often extend their interventions and investigations beyond formal aesthetic elements to include conceptual, historical and contextual references. What are the challenges and opportunities facing artists working in the field today who are following in the footsteps of Land Art from earlier time periods?
This panel will highlight the work and research of artists, activists, critics and curators who are engaged in practices that explore land use, water rights and issues of indigenous sovereignty. We are interested in how this dialogue can transcend borders that typically reinforce nationalism and privatization. Indigenous artists are creating very innovative work in response to landscape through a process of truth and reconciliation – can a post-colonial critique effectively challenge globalization through Land Art? How might artists work with local communities to resist socio-economic systems that favor private property? Do forms of social practice and creative place making offer new models for civic engagement to transform public property and the commons? As issues of water rights become more critical to the conversation, how are the fields of environmental and ecological art merging with Land Art?
Latinx Sounds: Auditory Technologies of Resistance and Aural Practices of Social Transformation
US Latinx Art Forum
Chair: Joshua Rios - The School of the Art Institute of Chicago
Sound and noise play an integral role in the structuring of social and political life, particularly as auditory-based practices become characterized and leveraged as either normative or aberrant in the struggle over resource extraction and distribution. Conceptualizations, and even legal definitions, regarding what constitutes sound and what constitutes noise change over time, thus notions of sound and noise can be mapped within a field of colonial and state power. Thinking about sound regulation as a “politics by other means” allows cultural criticism and historical analysis to listen, balancing the overly scopic frameworks that tend to outline political, philosophic, and ethical articulations of social life. Additionally, the role sound plays (in the form of the protest song, for example) is integral to the foundation of communities of practice and communities of opposition. This panel seeks academic and performative presentations that create scholarship and epistemic inquiry around the politics of sound and critical sound practices as they relate to Latinx social, political, and cultural histories of resistance and celebration in a U.S. context. Guiding questions for this session include: How does noise come to be defined in opposition to sound, under what conditions and for whom? How are certain definitions of noise and the policing of sound mobilized to maintain authority over communities of color, especially Latinx communities in the United States? In what ways do noise and sound practices formulate oppositional publics and engender methods of social transformation.
Letters to Lucy
Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution
Chair: Mary Savig - Archives of American Art,
Chair: Josh T. Franco - Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
The Archives of American Art will host a session panel on the subject of Lucy Lippard’s correspondence. This panel will consider letters to and from art critic Lippard in her papers, which include correspondence with Julie Ault, Harmony Hammond, Joseph Kosuth, Sol LeWitt, Ana Mendieta, Howardena Pindell, and many others. The detailed finding aid to the Lucy Lippard papers can be found online at https://www.aaa.si.edu/collections/lucy-r-lippard-papers-7895. There are also Lippard’s letters in other collections to consider, including the papers of Kathy Vargas, Ellen Lanyon, Robert Smithson and Nancy Holt, and the Woman’s Building records.
How do these letters bring nuance and empathy to the study of American art and Lippard’s many roles therein? More broadly, how do we evaluate personal correspondence as historical records?
Paper topics might include:
- Conceptual correspondence of Vito Acconci, Hanne Darboven, Jonathan Borofsky, Iaian Baxter, among many others.
- Ray Johnson and Mail Art
- Feminist consciousness-raising and the organization of Heresies Collective.
- The articulation of political positions outside public discourse.
- Backstories of critical texts and exhibitions involving or led by Lippard.
- The construction of the art world through personal relationships.
- The research value of correspondence in public collections.
Liberal Democracy and Social Practice
Women’s Caucus for Art
Chair: Susan M. King - Independent Scholar
Liberal democracy is at stake, not just in the United States, but the world over. The rise of nationalism and reactionary politics, and moreover authoritarianism, have played a part in the Brexit vote in the UK, the rise of the National Front in France, Trump’s election in the US, and Putin’s reelection in Russia. Former Secretary of State Madeline Albright has said, “If we think of fascism as a wound from the past that had almost healed, putting Trump in the White House was like ripping off the bandage and picking at the scab.” Art and artists play a central role in the efforts to counter these nationalist, xenophobic, and racist politics. What kinds of art practices, visual cultures, and artistic organizations have been recently formed to stand against neo-fascism, totalitarianism, and divisive narratives that pit people against each other? Can theory be effectively incubated to address this kind of social practice? With what outcomes? And with what impact, if any, on political institutions and public opinion? Analyses, histories, and accounts of critical and creative responses to the current wave of nationalist politics are welcome. Possible topics include, but are not limited to: the history, purposes, and practices of anti-fascist art and critical popular culture; use of networked technologies to transcend or critique institutions; and analyses of artistic efforts to renew and change society.
Life, Agency & Ecology: Aesthetics of Human-Nonhuman Encounters in Environmental and Biological Art
Chair: Elizabeth A. Demaray - Rutgers University The State University of New Jersey
Chair: Ellen K. Levy
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
This panel will bring together practicing artists and theorists whose work focuses on relations between humans, non-human organisms and the environment. Whether referred to as bio-art, environmental or any myriad of other names, the focus on human-nonhuman-environmental interaction resonates across these practices. These practices all share a desire to explore zones of negotiation and reciprocity between the human and more than human worlds. Matter, the environmental and non-human life are seen not as passive and inert but rather as lively and dynamic, with agency or lifeworlds of their own. Through various types of processes-driven practices that feature combinations of living matter, emerging technologies, transdisciplinary collaboration and public engagement, artists are not only exploring how these systems can serve as vectors of novelty and unexpected variety, they are also forging a new aesthetics and systems of ideas focused on showcasing alternative possibilities of human/non-human relations in the age of climate change and environmental degradation. This panel seeks to understand the role of art in revealing and understanding our place in this new world. What can aesthetic experiences reveal about the ongoing, dynamic individuations in the world? How can art disrupt our anthropocentric tendencies? In this panel, we will explore technological art as a means to understand environmental, biological and ecological systems. The panel participants will discuss their work and individual approaches to these topics, followed by a panel discussion.
Linking Museum to Place
Chair: Alick M. McLean - Syracuse Univ In Italy
The close viewing of objects that art museums provide runs the risk of disconnecting those same objects from their original contexts. We see the objects well, yet lose sight of the places and communities out of which and for which artists, workshops, and patrons brought them to life. Recent museums, particularly museums with holdings from their own communities and histories, have begun to address this challenge. The results, such as at Prato’s Museo Palazzo Pretorio, the Museo delle Terre Nuove at San Giovanni Valdarno, the Acropolis Museum in Athens, or the Gülhane Museum in Topkapı Palace, have shown how contextualizing brings new life to familiar objects, in turn attracting broader lay audiences to their museums, and thereby new, often unexpected supporters to art. Such diverse audiences are essential to sustain, even to enhance the voices of artists and scholars of art in the public sphere.
This session seeks contributions from scholars, curators, museum administrators, museum architects, and gallery installation designers who have found ways to relink their objects to place, whether their original physical contexts, their historical communities, parallel contexts in the museum’s own locale, or otherwise. We welcome proposals documenting the localization practices of existing or projected museums.
Looking East: Russian Orientalism in a Global Context
Society of Historians of East European, Eurasian, and Russian Art and Architecture
Chair: Maria Taroutina - Yale-NUS College
Chair: Allison Leigh - University of Louisiana at Lafayette
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Much like their Western contemporaries, Russian and East European artists were seduced by the exotic appeal of the “Orient,” especially the cultures of Central Asia and the Caucasus. However, Orientalist painting remained ambiguous in the Russian and East European context given their conflicted self-identification as neither fully European nor quintessentially Asian. Thus, the demarcations between “self” and “other” among these artists were much more porous than for their Western counterparts, resulting in an Orientalist mode that was prone to hybridity, syncretism, and even self-Orientalization. The present panel invites papers that reconsider the enduring relationship between Russia, Eastern Europe and their non-Western neighbors and the ways in which artists, architects, designers and performers engaged with this relationship throughout the centuries and into the present. What significance did Russia’s perception of its position on the periphery of the West and its simultaneous self-consciousness as a colonial power have on its artistic and cultural identity? In what ways did artists from a range of territories – spanning from Georgia and Armenia to Uzbekistan and Russia’s far east – interrogate, contest and revise the seemingly stable categories of “East” and “West”? To what extent did cultural practitioners participate in the discursive matrices that advanced Russia’s colonial machinery on the one hand and critiqued and challenged it on the other, especially in territories that were themselves on the fault lines between East and West? This panel invites papers from all historical periods and geographical contexts and welcomes investigations of a variety of different media.
Making/Writing Artists’ Lives
Chair: Monica C Bravo - California College of the Arts
Chair: Sarah E. Kanouse - Northeastern University
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Recent exhibitions like MoMA’s survey of Walid Raad and the Whitney’s presentation of To Wander Determined: Toyin Ojih Odutola centered on artists who have created fictional personas. Raad is the archivist of the Atlas Group, but also its sole member, while Ojih Odutola signs her name as the “Deputy Private Secretary” of two fictional Nigerian aristocratic families. Such practices are emblematic of a turn to autobiographical “parafictions,” or self-authoring acts that stand with what Carrie Lambert-Beatty describes as “one foot in the real.” Between the fully fictional artistic persona and the autobiographic confessional lie a range of strategies for performing a ‘self’ that is historically situated, yet sometimes anachronistic, heterogeneously influenced, and frequently politicized.
Such artistic self-authoring practices run against the grain of traditional art historical approaches to the artist’s career: continuity (a Kantian unfolding, characterized especially by progress) or rupture (a given period is marked off, sometimes due to geography or subject matter). Emphasizing one or the other logic, the museum or gallery retrospective, mid-career survey, and focus exhibition all attempt to make meaning of an artist’s body of work through periodization. Each represents fundamentally different philosophies about the nature of artistic practice, as well as human life. How do artists understand the development of their careers in ways that align with, or push against, such art historical and museological models? What might art historical approaches to artists’ lives learn from creative practices that draw on the auto-biographical and the fictional to broaden the contours of individual experience?
Material, Materiality, Materialism
Chair: Deborah L. Krohn - Bard Graduate Center
Chair: Catherine L. Whalen
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
While the physical properties of matter have long been the domain of scientists, the words ‘material’ and its cognates ‘materiality’ and ‘materialisms’ have become ubiquitous in multiple fields across the humanities and social sciences, from history of art and design to literature and philosophy to anthropology and sociology. What does the ‘material turn’ mean for art and design historians? How do such discourses intersect with longstanding practices of object-centered studies, including archaeology, connoisseurship, and conservation? Building upon the session Material Culture and Art History: A State of the Field(s) Panel Discussion (sponsored by Association of Research Institutes in Art History) at last year’s conference in Los Angeles, we are interested in papers that consider, evaluate, and comment upon the ways in which the terms material, materiality and/or materialisms inform studies of art and design. Rather than case studies, we seek reflective perspectives.
Maternal Subjectivity in Contemporary Art
Chair: Robert R. Shane - The College of Saint Rose
Chair: Susan A. Van Scoy - St. Joseph’s College
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
In recent decades, theorists from Julia Kristeva to Alison Stone have been forging new discourses on maternal subjectivity. Challenging the relegation of mothers to mere objects of infantile desire and their subordination in patriarchal society, theories of maternal subjectivity bear witness to mothers’ own agency, autonomy, and desire and, in Stone’s words, “regenerate new meanings adapted to one’s own situation and history.” Parallel to these developments in theory, contemporary artists—such as Mary Kelly, Renée Cox, Susana Guerrero, Kasey Jones, Megan Wynne, and Carmen Winant, among others—have addressed the intersections between maternal subjectivity, the corporeal experience of maternity, and social constructions of motherhood. These artists critically engage with traditional tropes of maternity—as in Catherine Opie’s Self-Portrait/Nursing, which invokes Renaissance images of the Madonna—or create new visions—as in Ming Smith’s Self-Portrait with Mingus showing herself simultaneously as a nursing mother and professional artist. This session welcomes submissions of papers that investigate the construction of maternal subjectivity in the work of contemporary artists who address pregnancy, natality, breastfeeding, maternal eroticism, the maternal body, maternity and shame/empowerment, or other facets of maternity. Submissions employing intersectional feminist approaches are encouraged.
Chair: Julia Scher - KHM
The panel will consider surveillance and its techno-political implications in the context of social control today.
The interwoven worlds of computational, social, architectural, aural, forensic, and observational surveillance continue to be explored by artists. Since the 1980’s cultural theory, media art, film, and activism, have all played a role in defining the field. Many artists felt their duty to bring out or “deconstruct” surveillance’s means in order to help expose it’s control workings. Since that time, tech culture, computing tools, and the avalibility of vast interconnected networks allow artists to highlight the tools and consequences of surveillance’s ongoing reproduction (and deletion) capabilities. Along uncovering formerly secretive, restricted or covert operations, (such as with corporate or government hands) new surveillance works’ engage and critique the explosion of artificial intelligence and new virtuality.
Materials and means put into play by artists include: artistic research, independent labs, code writing, work for mobil devices, lectures, public interventions, signage, film, online services and actions, re-enactments, performances, word and text pieces, teaching, installation, sound art, writing, sculpture, photography, outerspace deployments, video, deep data aggregation, radio.
Further possible subjects include: cyber technology, trusted systems, criminology, crypto identification, surveillance monuments, surveillance culture, gender and identity, artificial agents, (SIRI, ALEXA...always watching) sexuality, intrusion control, visual pleasure, prisons, discrimination, and racial, religious and other profiling.
Minimal Art: An Urban History
Chair: Kirsten J. Swenson - University of Massachusetts, Lowell
Chair: Christopher M Ketcham
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Minimal art’s urban history, particularly its relationship to New York City, is a critical socio-political context. Yet artists’ complex relationships to the socioeconomic and spatial politics of the city have largely been foreclosed by phenomenological readings that delimit a universal, heteronormative (male) body. Carl Andre and Alice Adams made sculptures from materials scavenged from streets, razed buildings, and leftover spaces of urban renewal. Tony Smith’s first solo exhibition in New York City was organized by the mayoral administration of John Lindsay, held in Bryant Park partly as a foil to the park’s status as a gathering place for gay men. Sol LeWitt employed New York’s zoning codes as a conceptual basis of his sculpture, an implicit critique of the corporate aesthetic of midtown architecture. By 1970, figures including Dennis Oppenheim, Richard Serra, Vito Acconci, and Trisha Brown, had broadened minimalism’s claim to the street, even as institutional consolidation of the canon reinforced its autonomy from everyday life. This panel seeks new approaches to assess the concrete intersections between minimal art and the social, spatial, material and economic life of the city. Did minimal art’s phenomenology engage new paths of urban perception or the problematic visibility of politicized bodies charged with class, race, and gender? Did opportunities to work in the city open new territory for artists that lacked institutional support? How did emergent curatorial framings of public art extend the reach of minimal and conceptual art to communities that conventional galleries and museums were blind to?
Modernist Prodigals: Aesthetic Aftermaths of Religious Conversion
Chair: Anne Greeley - Indiana Wesleyan University
Over the past two decades, the long-presumed secularity of modern art has been called increasingly into question. Numerous scholars, from Sally Promey, to Jonathan Anderson and William Dyrness, to Thomas Crow, have challenged the secularization theory promulgated by art historians during the latter half of the twentieth century. Though the academy no longer finds it “inadmissible,” as Rosalind Krauss once did, to connect the spiritual with the avant-garde, and while many religious impulses can be discerned throughout the field of modern art, it is nevertheless the case that many modern artists rejected religion outright––though some only temporarily. This panel aims to build on the discussion initiated by Jeffrey Abt in his 2014 panel on “Religion and the Avant-Garde.” It seeks to further clarify modern art’s relationship to religion by examining the lives and work of certain “modernist prodigals,” who during a period of religious apathy or disbelief made significant contributions to modernism before turning, or returning, to organized religion. If art can be said to constitute a mode of thought, and if thought is radically altered through religious conversion, then what might a study of the works of such artists, “pre-” and “post-” conversion, reveal about the perceived compatibility of modern art (or of certain iterations or aspects thereof) with a religious worldview? Alternatively, what might it reveal about an artist’s faith? Possible artists to consider include, but are not limited to: Hugo Ball, Paul Cézanne, William Congdon, Albert Gleizes, Alfred Manessier, Ludwig Meidner, Gino Severini, and Jan Verkade.
North American Landscapes and Counter-histories
Chair: Jocelyn Anderson
Chair: Julia Lum
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Histories of landscape art in North America in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries have often been dominated by European aesthetic and stylistic narratives. In this period, the “picturesque”, the “romantic” and the “sublime” were codified in Europe, yet they also proved to be extraordinarily flexible in their applicability to diverse regions and topographies. At the same time, these categories are sometimes incongruent with the historical conditions to which they’ve been applied, or were fundamentally altered by artists’ negotiations with locality and place. This panel invites papers which seek to offer radical alternative readings of landscapes in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries by prioritizing the relationship between artistic production and specific local and regional political, social and environmental conditions. It invites papers with the potential to reorganize histories of landscape around hemispheric and transcultural approaches that illuminate the complex territorial, cultural and political developments of a period in which empires collided, nations took shape, and treaties were signed and broken. Papers addressing a range of media are welcome, and possible topics might include (but are not limited to) landscapes and counter-mapping, artistic negotiations with Indigenous sovereignties and stewardship, landscapes and the legal status of sites, the relationship between topographical landscapes and surveyors’ work, landscape views and military geographies, heritage and cultural memory, urban and rural economies of labor in art, and the circulation of landscape representations in personal and family circles.
Not your Typical Residency: Artists and the Research Institute
Association of Research Institutes in Art History
Chair: Marie-Stephanie M. Delamaire - Winterthur Museum
Chair: Amelia A. Goerlitz - Smithsonian American Art Museum
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Research fellowships at museums, libraries, and academies are a standard offering for art historians who need access to primary materials and time for focused inquiry and writing. Artist residencies, on the other hand, usually provide studio or exhibition space and a stimulating environment where one can embark on a new creative project. What happens when these two models overlap? How and why have some research institutes chosen to support artistic investigation as well as academic scholarship? This panel invites contributions from artist-recipients and scholar-hosts who have participated in these unusual appointments. We welcome proposals for short presentations that consider the following questions: What is the role of artist-led research within what have traditionally been academically focused institutions? How can these institutions best respond to artists’ particular methods of investigation? How might artists help museums and libraries think afresh about their collections and art historical research? What can a library or museum offer a contemporary artist that a studio space cannot? What are the benefits and challenges of blending artists and scholars within a single program? What are the outcomes of such residency programs? By inviting artists into museums, libraries, and academies where they can delve into historical collections, access rare books and archives, and discuss their work with colleagues from various disciplines, are artists’ fellowships transforming academic research and/or artistic practice?
Occasional Art: intimacy, transience and community in the 20th and 21st centuries
Chair: Christa Noel Robbins - University of Virgina
In his 1951 essay “Advance-Guard Writing,” Paul Goodman argued that the “present-day advance-guard” is realized in “the physical reestablishment of community.” Claiming that a core characteristic of avant-garde practice is its lack of a receptive audience, Goodman states that experimental artists necessarily turn to their “small community of acquaintances” for support and critique. The avant-gardist addresses this audience “personally,” Goodman contends, creating works that, at their best, double as “acts of love.” Goodman’s term for such work was the “occasional”: art made for specific occasions, with particular people in mind. Such a characterization stands against normative theories of the avant-garde that judge its success according to its ability to sustain a critical engagement with the so-called “institution of art.” Placing the occasional—the intimate, the transient and the communal—at the center of avant-garde values over and above the more typical emphasis on the institutional, the national and the theoretical, shifts our perspective of the history of modernist and avant-garde art. The occasional pervades various groups of modernist and avant-garde artists: from Bloomsbury to Black Mountain, CoBrA to AfriCOBRA, artists cultivated present-tense relations over and above their concern to advance art’s history and create permanent, “world-historical” works for the future. This panel invites papers on themes, figures and concepts that get marginalized when we attend to the lasting products of modernist and avant-garde practice, instead of to the anecdotal or occasional details of their production. Possible topics include “queer modernism,” anecdotal theory, art history’s “dark matter,” performance, pedagogy, communes, collectives and coalitions.
Of Mutable Monuments and Changing Attitudes: Learning from the Long History of Altering, Appropriating and Recontextualizing Italian Art
Chair: Felicia M. Else - Gettysburg College
Chair: Roger Crum - Dayton University
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Conflicting sentiments have recently challenged the once seemingly inviolate nature of monuments in the public sphere. With this on-going debate in mind, the time is ripe to explore this topic within the longer tradition of Italian art. From ancient Rome to the present, Italian art has been shaped not just by its production but its recontextualization, appropriation, and care (or lack thereof), all acts that have arisen in response to changing historical, social, and political forces. This session seeks case studies in which Italian art becomes something other than what it once was or was intended to be, whether through intentional destruction, reworking, recontextualization, appropriation, restoration, or simply neglect to suit different, even conflicting purposes. Studies might address but are not limited to the transformations of viewing spaces, physical changes ranging from modest erasure to total elimination, or the dissemination of viewpoints, whether passing anecdotes or biting satires. Subjects from all chronological periods are welcome, and speakers are encouraged to consider not simply the motivations of historical actors involved but the opportunities, challenges, or obligations that contemporary scholars face in documenting and “fixing” the various “histories” of Italian art. Priority will be given to studies that present new approaches and strong historical evidence but also convey broader implications for the changing public conceptions of art and the problematics of “heritage” in Italy and the world beyond.
Old Wine, New Wine, and What Bottle Should We Use?
National Council of Art Administrators
Chair: David LaPalombara - Ohio University
Chair: Charles Kanwischer
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
What does expertise in a craft signify in a new and rapidly evolving media world? Is there a future for disciplinarity in an interdisciplinary world? This panel will consider how we define and create productive relationships between traditional and new media, fine and applied art and design, and how programs can maintain disciplinary coherence while sponsoring interdisciplinary work. Important to this consideration is how first-year foundations programs can set the stage for disciplinary practice, as well as challenge critical thinking about disciplinarity. (Note: must be, or become, a member of the National Council of Arts Administrators to be considered for this session).
Open Session for Emerging Scholars of Latin American Art
Association for Latin American Art
Chair: Theresa Avila - California State University Channel Islands
Chair: Arden Decker - Independent Scholar
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
This session seeks to highlight the scholarship of advanced graduate and recent Ph.D. scholars. Papers may address any geographic region, theme, or temporal period (pre-Columbian, Colonial, Modern, and Contemporary) related to the study of Latin American, Caribbean, and Latinx art or art history.
The range of topics addressed may include, but is not limited to, the following:
- Nation building and citizenship
- Race, class or gender
- Social justice and human rights
- The visualization of revolution and war
- The female body in visual culture
- Development and underdevelopment
- The natural world and science
- Defining and redefining public space
- Politics of display in museums and galleries
Please note, Association for Latin American Art (ALAA) membership is not required at the time of paper proposal, but all speakers will be required to be active members at the time of the annual meeting.
Potential Subject Areas: 1) Art History-Latin American/Caribbean Art; 2) Art History-Pre-Columbian Art
Other Phenomenologies in American Art
Association of Historians of American Art
Chair: Catherine R. Holochwost - La Salle University
Chair: Louise E. Siddons
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Thinking about the body as a source of knowledge has had a salutary effect on the field of American art. Recent studies have been constrained, however, by the framework of continental philosophy, and its admittedly influential genealogy of phenomenology. In this panel, we invite contributors to ask what other forms of bodily knowledge have been mobilized throughout the history of American art? How can earlier figures in philosophy and pre-Freudian psychology, including John Dewey, William James, or the British associationist psychologists, help us uncover the range, forms, and tensions of other phenomenologies within a broad range of practice? How might other traditions, ranging from indigenous epistemologies to contemporary theoretical stances coming from feminism, queer studies, or ecocriticism, invite us to reconsider American art history in terms of bodily knowledge? What contributions are made by performance theory, body techniques, and bodily practice to our understanding of material objects, including works of art? We seek bodies of scientific knowledge, lived experience, and/or religious beliefs that can that help us recover the corporeal intelligences available before or outside the philosophy of Husserl, Merleau-Ponty, Camus, etc. We welcome case studies, but also encourage submissions that consider methodological or theoretical models more broadly.
Painted Books of Pre-Hispanic Mexico: New Discoveries
Chair: Anne W. Cassidy - Carthage College
Painted books from Mexico’s pre-Hispanic past through the early colonial period constitute a rich body of art and an eloquent source for study of the interdependence of aesthetic, scientific, and philosophic activities in Mesoamerica. Recently there have been rapid advances on multiple fronts in understandings of the codices and their contexts. On the one hand, studies focusing on materiality are increasingly important, such as pigment analysis and changes in the surface from repainting or resurfacing. For example, work by Davide Domenici and his colleagues on the Mayan Codex Madrid, and work by Élodie Dupey Garcìa on central Mexican ritual calendars combine studies of the physical properties of the codices with archaeological and ethnohistoric data. On the other hand, interpretive studies that combine close iconographic analysis with astronomical and/or meterological and/or historic events have also flourished in recent years, upending long accepted views of pre-Hispanic ritual calendars. Perhaps most importantly, scholars like Jansen and Pérez Jiménez have furthered interpretive work by examining “multiple intersections between cultural interpretive research and the still outstanding issues of decolonisation.” This session seeks studies of pre-Hispanic Mesoamerican manuscripts and colonial manuscripts in the native tradition from all areas of Mesoamerica. Interdisciplinary approaches are especially welcome, in particular approaches that shed light on the pre-Hispanic histories of the manuscripts.
Paragone Open Session: Topics on the Past and Present of Rivalry in the Arts
Society for Paragone Studies
Chair: Sarah J. Lippert - University of Michigan-Flint
Papers in this session explore the history of rivalry in the arts. Topics are invited for an open session on an era of art history and from any geographical area or medium. Examples of rivalry in the arts include competition between specific artists, patrons, nations, artistic media, critics, theorists, institutions, etc. Rivalry may be related to theories of the sister arts, iconodules/iconophobes, iconoclasm, ekphrasis, ut pictura poesis, or other theoretical and practical traditions. It may also take the form of competition for resources or prestige in arts organizations. Presentations from practicing artists on how competition has impacted their work are also welcome.
Patronage and Piety in Early Netherlandish Painting
Chair: Barbara G. Lane
This session will focus on the patronage of individual Early Netherlandish altarpieces, focusing on the patrons’ roles in the content and appearance of their commissions. Papers may investigate the patron’s participation (or lack thereof) in the choice of the subject and the way it is depicted, the extent of his or her involvement with changes during its execution, and/or the reasons for delays in the delivery of the work to its intended destination. Papers that consider such issues in works intended for spiritual pilgrimage are especially welcome.
Performance and Protest: Directions in Contemporary Spaces
Chair: Kathleen M. Wentrack - City University of New York - Queensborough Community College
This panel aims to interrogate the intersection between art and protest and the ways in which visual presentations of ideals are created and shared. The Whitney Museum of American Art has worked to present images of protest in their ongoing exhibition An Incomplete History of Protest that “looks at how artists from the 1940s to the present have confronted the political and social issues of their day.” While much has been gained since the heady days of 1960s protests, feminist arts, art histories, curatorial practices, and models of critique remain necessary and urgent. Dialogue on these activities informs our perspective on the struggle many endure in the absence of equality and in the presence of patriarchal authority. Therefore, this panel will investigate the crucial role of current art practices and contemporary protest activities to engage our collective future. What are the compelling questions being addressed today? In what ways is art production creating new narratives, challenging hierarchies of knowledge, or playing with boundaries to forge new relationships? Submissions may include but are not limited to models serving as acts of resistance, local practices informing cross-cultural understanding, feminism expanding pedagogies, or the support of social issues on human rights and connections to artistic production. In addition, the panel aims to explore how challenges from/by the LGBTQIA communities, disabled, people of color, immigrants, and economically disadvantaged are intertwined with issues of protest.
Perimeter, Periphery, Partition: Exploring Boundaries in Global Pre-Modern Gardens and Landscapes (3000 BCE- 8th c CE)
Chair: Victoria Austen-Perry - King’s College London
Chair: Kaja Joanna Tally-Schumacher - Cornell University
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Gardens and landscapes are bounded spaces, framed by real and semiotic walls or boundaries (Spencer 2010, 5), which we tend to read ‘inwards’ from the perspective of their edges (Benjamin 1985, 78). They are not raw, unmediated, or unconsidered spaces; instead, there is ‘artfulness’ in their cultivated construction. Yet, at the same time, gardens and landscapes also connect us to the world ‘out there’ (Bender 2006, 303). The plants and animals within them represent nature’s eternal nomadic status, in the form of airborne seeds, migratory species, or imported luxury objects. As cultural products linked to time and memory, gardens and landscapes also afford multivalent interpretations and transform the physical space into a medium through which something other than superficial reality can be seen.
This panel seeks to bring together scholars who work on diverse periods and regions to interrogate the notion of boundedness as a key characteristic of pre-modern gardens and landscapes and explore the perception of these spaces, both physically and metaphysically, in response to their limits. Considering the ideas of perimeter, periphery, and partition in real, imagined, and represented sites, we invite submissions that explore how gardens and landscapes are defined by, reinforce, or mitigate boundaries; how they serve to deconstruct boundaries; and/or the implications of physical and conceptual movements across boundaries.
Photography, Myth, and Architecture
Chair: Federica Soletta
The association between architecture and photography has been fundamental since the invention of the medium: photographs documented far away architecture, new constructions, and urban transformations. In its documentary function, photography transformed the object, distant in time and space, into an ever-present one. On the one hand, to the Western eye, photography unveiled the temples of Angkor, the adobe of Timbuktu, or the monuments of India, tempering their mythic aura. Looking at it through the lens of Honoré de Balzac’s suggestive theory, photography possibly “removed the layers” of myth from the photographed object (Nadar, 1900). On the other hand, photography reinforced and even created national myths and revivals through the photographic collections of gothic cathedrals, classic architecture, and new constructions and infrastructures.
Myths, in the words of Roland Barthes, hide nothing and flaunt nothing: they distort. In this increasing photographic revelation of the world, circulating through popular and academic platforms, how did photography create, maintain, or destroy the mythic quality of architecture? How, from the mid-nineteenth century to today, did the myth of photography distort the reality and the imaginary of the architectural discourse?
The session welcomes papers that engage with the relationship between myth and the photography of architecture, broadly defined. Its principal aim is to explore the instrumental agency of photography in the creation and destruction of myths in architectural representation and to understand how such agency shapes the relations among photography, truth, imagination, and architectural narrative.
Picturing and Performing Martial Masculinities
Chair: Chassica F Kirchhoff - The University of Kansas
Chair: Sean Kramer - University of Michigan
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Martial subjects, bellicose contexts of creation, or military functions often generate artworks that invite novel considerations of the ways that masculinity can be constructed, performed, and critiqued. We consider masculinity in a broad sense as referring to sets of performances and ideologies, which coalesce into conceptions of individual and corporate identity. The military plays a major role in formulating those conceptions both within its ranks and in culture at large. Images with martial subject matter or objects of martial material culture traverse disciplinary and cultural divisions as well as historical moments. This panel will interrogate the visual, performative, and ideological roles of masculinity in art and culture that engage with armies and warfare. Avenues of inquiry may include, but are not limited to, the following questions: How do militaries (re)construct the concepts of self and nation; how are these reconstructions visualized and inflected by militarism and nationalism? How does visual culture construct, engage with, or critique ideals of martial masculinity? How do issues of violence versus sociability complicate the construction of masculine identities? How do uniforms and/or other forms of military costume negotiate masculine identities? We encourage proposals that explore these concepts from all geographic locations and chronological time periods.
Portraits Of Power: Legitimacy, Symbolism, And Ideology In The Public Portrait Gallery
Chair: Craig Reynolds
Chair: Emily C. Gerhold
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
The compiling of portrait collections and galleries of exemplary individuals to act as models for the public has long been a practice within the artistic traditions of Europe and the Americas. From sculptural images of Roman emperors housed in temples and inscribed with their lineages, honors, and achievements, to the ‘Windsor Beauties,’ Sir Peter Lely’s portraits of the most celebrated English noblewomen of the 1660s, to public portrait memorials commissioned to romanticize the Confederacy’s Lost Cause myth and erected throughout the American South during the Jim Crow era, public galleries and portrait collections offer clear lessons about the values and traits that were commended at the times and in the places they were composed. Recently, the unveiling of the portraits of Barack and Michelle Obama has sparked a new conversation around the role of the public portrait collection and invited consideration of the way that portrait galleries signified– and continue to signify–national identity, power, status, and legitimacy. While the many variations of the portraitive mode are well studied, a scholarly examination of the broader act of creating, maintaining, propagating, and contextualizing portrait collections and galleries is critically missing from the discourse. We welcome submissions addressing any aspect of the public display and diffusion of portrait collections from the ancient world to the contemporary. Possible topics for exploration might include: the gendered nature of portrait galleries; public response to the likenesses themselves; the location of portrait collections and controlled access; and didactic narratives written to accompany portrait galleries.
Power, Resistance, and Gender Issues in the Arts of Women
Coalition of Women in the Arts Organization (CWAO)
Chair: Kyra Belan - Broward College
This panel, titled Power, Resistance, and Gender Issues in the Arts of Women, will examine and explain the involvement of women artists with social issues, gender, political, resistance, or protest arts. The experience of women in the arts is unique in our society because of their gender, and presents special and unique challenges within our social establishment. Women, therefore, analyze and examine the issues that they feel are relevant, and may also have concerns with racial, ecological, political and other social problems that take place in the US and world wide today. This frequently leads them into experimentation with the new media, new technologies, conceptual, collaborative, interactive, and other art forms that may or may not be yet a part of the art establishment’s traditions. Because of the feminist point of view, these artworks may break new grounds and redirect the future of the artistic sensibilities and productions.
Public Art and Political Change: All Things That Rise
Professional Practices Committee
Chair: Greg W. Shelnutt - University of Delaware
Public art, as defined by the online Art Encyclopedia is “an umbrella term which includes any work of art purchased with public funds, or which comes into the public domain (by donation, or by public display, etc.) irrespective of where it is situated in the community, or who sees it.” One might extend that last phrase in light of the recent toppling of Confederate statuary in Baltimore, Charlottesville, Durham, and New Orleans to “or who sees it last.” The dismantling of public art is not new. There is a long history of the removal of public works that extends beyond Serra’s Tilted Arc. In 1776 the Continental Army transformed a lead statue of King George III into 42,088 musket balls. The global history of iconoclasm includes Akhenaten’s orders to eradicate images of his predecessor along with the traditional Egyptian gods. Perhaps something truly new is afoot, more than simply a “Not In My Back Yard” reaction. As Jayce Fortin wrote in the New York Times about the removal of Saddam Hussein’s statue in Iraq, “Broken statues and torn portraits figured prominently years later in the Arab Spring. They did not herald peaceful change.” The Professional Practices Committee is currently reviewing the Guidelines for Public Art Works. In our current environment how integral are local, regional and national politics to the discourse surrounding works of art in the public domain? This session will discuss recent socio-political issues around public art and question the importance of legacy, history and purpose.
Public Art and Political Elections
Public Art Dialogue
Chair: Marisa Lerer - Manhattan College
Chair: Jennifer K. Favorite - CUNY Graduate Center
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
The 2016 elections in the U.S., the recent presidential elections in Venezuela and Russia, and the 2018 elections in Brazil have injected questions on electoral integrity into the public conversation. Corrupt voting practices is just one of many problems that highlight the need for election reform. Historically and in our contemporary moment, public art has played a key role in navigating and conveying politically charged messages, as well as in highlighting flaws within political systems. This session aims to explore how public artworks have addressed representations of democracy, political candidates, and the electoral process. Submissions to this panel should examine specific aspects of the visual culture of international, national, and local elections, and discuss the role that public art has adopted in visualizing the complex networks of electoral politics. How have artists working in public art in the expanded field translated, shifted, and reframed the debates around elections? How are art practices applied as a tool for both propagandistic and didactic efforts in relation to candidates, political issues, suffrage rights, or “get out the vote” campaigns? What is the role of the commissioning process undertaken by electoral teams and activist organizations to bring their messaging to potential voters? How has public art visualized or reinvented ways to confront fraudulent electoral systems? Case studies on historical and contemporary topics are welcome as are proposals for future projects. This session encourages participation from artists, art historians, interdisciplinary scholars, curators, and theorists.
Public Monuments and Sculpture in Postwar Europe
European Postwar and Contemporary Art Forum
Chair: Martina Maria Tanga - deCordova Sculpture Park
The term monument comes from two Latin words: monumentum, meaning to remind and monere, meaning to admonish. In Italy, Benito Mussolini fully recognized these twin potentials and instrumentalize public sculpture for political ends. Indeed, the author Italo Calvino felt that Fascism had colonized Italy’s public realm with the innumerable monuments and buildings dedicated to spreading the regime’s agenda. How, then, did the monument subsist—with its dual meaning as both a reminder of the past and a warning of the future—in the immediate post-war years in Italy and other European countries occupied by Fascist or Nazi regimes? After the war, could the monument be reconceived as a vehicle for de-colonization?
This session delves into the politics of monuments and public sculpture in Europe’s urban landscape during the second half of the 20thcentury, when the rhetoric of Fascism and Nazism needed to be negotiated by artist and citizens now living in democratic states in the West and Communist countries in the East. Papers will be sought that explore public monuments and sculptures, created after 1945, that contend with historical, social, political, and urban relationships to ideologies of the Fascist and Nazi regimes, while also addressing issues relating to the time of their creation. This session is timely as America has contentiously dismantled monuments to its Confederate past and France has rid itself of all streets named after the Nazi collaborationist Marshall Pétain. Why have other European countries, like Italy, allowed its Fascist monuments to survive unquestioned?
Putting Teaching into Practice: Professors as Curators in College and University Teaching Museums
Chair: Horace D Ballard
Colleges and universities that boast a gallery or museum are increasingly asking faculty to serve as curatorial practitioners and curators to teach their area of expertise. In our global cultural moment of social media and political unrest, in which questions of intersectional identities and cultural appropriation often frame the way many students attend to works of art, how does the curator-professor balance the desire for pedagogical rigor with student disaffection with collections? This session aims for a discussion amongst the panelists and the audience. To that end, I am seeking those with examples of projects, courses, and interventions that get at one or more of the following ideas: teaching in the gallery space v. the seminar room; collaboration with faculty colleagues; invitations to various publics; town/gown relations; collection-sharing consortiums; etc. I imagine picking three panelists to provide context and examples totaling 10-15 minutes, lending ample time for questions and conversations.
Queen: Centering the Black Woman as the Subject of Beauty
Chair: Sarah A. Clunis
In art history’s multiple manifestations the Black woman’s body continues to be a figure of political agency that in the process of her representation embodies often paradoxical attributes. Often signified as sexualized or asexual, fetishized or peripheral, aggressive or subservient the representation of Black women, on a global level, encompasses a myriad of attributes. But basic beauty issues of hair texture, skin shade, and body shape often designate Black beauty ideals in a way that is increasingly enforced in depictions of the Black female body. Queen: Centering the Black Woman as the Subject of Beauty explores various global and historical portrayals of Black women in the arts with particular emphasis on works that center the Black woman as beautiful. The session will explore how Black women’s beauty has been celebrated through a variety of art forms and the relevant visual culture both traditional and contemporary that works to transform the Black woman from either a neglected or demarcated body into a body that exists within the realm of the beautiful. Negotiations of hair texture, skin color and body shape along with considerations of gender expression, sexuality, age, and disabilities are all possible aspects of this conversation. How are these considerations evident in art history and how do they act as agents of social control, within a greater network of images prescribing beauty, that regulate our discussions of visual arts, performance, and popular culture and how these genres focus on formal as well as conceptual concerns relative to this subject matter?
Queer Artists of Color in New York During the AIDS Epidemic
Chair: Robert Summers - Queer Art Network (Represented by John Paul Ricco)
When AIDS was spreading throughout New York – as too elsewhere – it impacted the artistic community in devastating ways, but in these dark times other artists and art, which were often blatantly political, emerged.
As of late, given the various anniversaries of the AIDS epidemic and the commencement of ACT-UP and other aesthetic-political movements, several books and art exhibitions, such as Art AIDS America (2015), emerged. But, what was lacking—if not elided—was the role of women, LGBT, and queer artists of color and/or artworks that represented the lives and politics of said artists.
Even though NY has been overly written about with regards to AIDS, HIV, art and/as activism—there has been little work done on women, LGBT, and queers of color during the early days of AIDS in the, then, art capital of the world. Thus, it is important to look at art by literary, visual, performance, and activist women of color and artists of color. If the work of Jose Muñoz has taught us anything, it is that hegemonic AIDS and art literature and history have a lot to learn from other histories and lives—as well as art, broadly construed, by woman and artists of color. Thus, this panel will explore those so often elided in this field of research and theorization in order to open the field to a broader spectrum.
Queer Work / Queer Archives
Queer Caucus for Art
Chair: Miriam Kienle - University of Kentucky
Chair: Jennifer Sichel - University of Chicago
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
This panel seeks papers that investigate the relationship between queer work and queer archives. Although “queering the archive” has become a key conceptual framework in art history, actual archival research is often engaged in a cursory or broadly theoretical manner. This panel, on the other hand, examines how sustained, creative engagement with archival material can recuperate queer spaces and practices. Historically, queer practices circumvented dominant institutions and experimented with materials and media not sanctioned by museums. Scholars concerned with queer practices must therefore devise new methods and strategies to scour archives for the ephemeral objects and documents that constitute this overlooked work. This panel provides a forum for scholars and artists who conduct research at the intersection of sexuality, social engagement, and art history, and for whom archival work is central to their practice. As theorist J. Halberstam writes, “the archive is not simply a repository; it is also a theory of cultural relevance, a construction of collective memory, and a complex record of queer activity. In order for the archive to function, it requires users, interpreters, and cultural historians to wade through the material and piece together the jigsaw puzzle of queer history in the making.” This panel seeks papers that embrace the queer labor of wading through material and piecing together fragments. The papers chosen will present case studies that address the theoretical stakes and methodological challenges of doing queer archival work. We welcome papers that attend closely to intersections of queerness and race, class, dis/ability, and/or nationality.
Race in the History of Design: Objects, Identity, Methodologies
Design Studies Forum (formerly Design Forum: History, Criticism and Theory)
Chair: Kristina F. Wilson - Clark University
Gender and class have been productive critical tools for design historians, but an analysis of the role of race in the study of objects, their makers, and their consumers has appeared in scholarship only in recent years. This session explores how methodologies associated with race—critical race studies, post-colonial theory, identity studies, place-consciousness—can be productively brought into design history. The history of design in the U.S. and Europe is often presumed to be racially neutral, but this is a consequence of scholarly blind spots rather than a historically accurate representation. How can discussions of race be brought to bear on objects which are mass produced, or on objects dispersed globally, across wide domains of consumers? How can we understand the role of race in the history of an object made in the past but still used in the present? How does race intersect with a global approach to design history, with histories of colonialism and imperialism? This session invites papers that examine these questions and the following: What role does race play in understanding the designer of an object? What role does race play in production and fabrication, especially when it is divorced from the design of an object? Is race relevant to understanding the marketing and consumption of design objects? Is it possible to interrogate the form of an object through the lenses of race? This panel seeks papers that explore the role of race in design history through case studies and through theoretical and methodological discussions.
Race, Vision, and Surveillance
Chair: Kimberly Rose Bobier - University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Chair: Marisa Williamson - Mason Gross School of the Arts, Rutgers University
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
This session addresses racial politics that have structured practices of surveillance. How and for whom have the visual arts subverted or supported racialized modes of social control? We welcome papers examining all periods, cultural frameworks, and racialized assemblages. Topics of consideration might include: models of vision; viewing apparatuses; phenomenology; biopower; biometrics; representational conventions; critical race and postcolonial approaches to photography or histories of display; social media protest; and digital epidermalization. In a post-9/11 internet era, conditions of governmental and corporate oversight can seem increasingly ubiquitous. Even so, as Simone Brown asserts, whether in the form of the Panopticon or the slave ship, surveillance is nothing new while, to borrow John Fiske’s words, “its penetration is differential.” In what ways are surveillance mechanisms distributed among and enacted on differently racialized entities? How do social and cultural variables that intersect with race and that emerge in distinct physical and visual sites affect epistemologies of sight? Along with these questions, speakers are welcome to grapple with constructs of seeing, art-making, and race-making in relation to themes of containment and movement such as those regarding stereotypes, checkpoints, states of fugitivity, statelessness, desires that transgress color lines, and issues of social mobility.
Redefining the University Art Gallery
Chair: Allison Rowe
This session will explore various ways that curators, faculty and post-secondary students have leveraged university art galleries to challenge pedagogical, historical and artistic expectations within higher education. In the spirit of the self-reflexive and radical turn in curation proposed by scholars such as, Molesworth and Bishop, this panel considers how university art galleries can be sites for the production of knowledge and the dissemination of perspectives normally excluded from academic and art discourses. Working from Moten and Harney’s conception of the Undercommons, this panel also considers how university art galleries can operate as spaces of refusal.
We are looking for paper submissions from artists, researchers, educators and museum staff that present experiences, discussions, or case studies/examples of artists or exhibitions that creatively and effectively make use of a university/college art gallery or museum. Non-traditional conference presentation methods and performance submissions are welcome.
Bishop, Claire. Radical Museology, Or, What’s Contemporary in Museums of Contemporary Art?. Berlin: Walther Konig, 2013.
Molesworth, Helen. “How To Install Art Like a Feminist.” Modern Women: Women Artists at the Museum of Modern Art, edited by Cornelia Butler and Alexandra Schwartz (New York: MoMA, 2010), 499-512.
Moten, Fred and Stefano Harney. The Undercommons: Fugitive Planning and Black Study. New York: Minor Compositions, 2013.
Reinventing Museums in Southeast Asia from the Colonial to the National, the Regional to the Global
Chair: Pearlie Rose S. Baluyut - SUNY Oneonta
Chair: Emily W Stokes-Rees - Syracuse University
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Characterized by their strategic location, colonial legacies, and newly industrialized and transnational economies, the mainland and maritime nations of Southeast Asia witnessed the emergence of museums in the 20th century, attesting to a robust if not profitable cultural infrastructure with tangible and intangible impact within and beyond the region. Inextricably linked to notions of progress, modern museums provided the necessary visibility, a projection of a decolonized, democratic, and developed nation. Yet the diverse ethnic, socio-economic, and political character of each nation challenged the narrative of nationalism, which, according to Benedict Anderson, “dreams of purities.” While state-sponsored museums unified discrepant material culture whose apotheosis was a distinct yet imagined national identity, recent curatorial and programmatic activities demonstrate the opposite to accommodate, integrate, and express multivalent citizenship, belonging, and meaning. Indeed, a greater cultural cooperation within and among nations has resulted in a dynamic exchange of ideas, objects, and labor. This panel seeks papers that explore the significant role of museums in Southeast Asia, considering their (trans)formation in a colonial, national, regional, and/or global context. Recognizing museums as (re)sources of power, we are interested in deepening our understanding of institutional policies and practices, such as acquisition, collection, preservation, exhibition, and education. Moreover, we wish to interrogate the contradictions inherent in this enterprise, as well as potential challenges and crises as contemporary art fairs and biennials take center stage.
Chair: Joseph R. Monteyne - University of British Columbia
Chair: Ivana Vranic - University of British Columbia
Email: Joseph.Monteyne@ubc.ca, firstname.lastname@example.org
Central to the discourse of art history, the concept of the Renaissance as a cultural, European or global movement has been contested, revitalized and expanded in recent decades. Despite being highly fraught, the concept remains in use to demarcate art and visual culture produced both in and outside of Italy between roughly 1300 and 1700. The multiplication of one into many renaissances, or Renaissance into Early Modern, in the second half of the twentieth century was based on the desire to exert cultural difference from values identified with the Italian Renaissance since the eighteenth century. Rather than dismiss these differences, the present panel seeks to explore links between renaissances by investigating ways in which art produced in this period was the result of multiple networks of artistic, economic and cultural exchange that had a global reach. In particular, we invite papers that trace multidirectional movements of ideas, forms and technologies of art-making along with artists, patrons and collectors across Europe, the New World, Africa, and Asia. We encourage papers that reframe renaissance art as a process of exchange by examining for example:
- How international trade routes, military campaigns, and missionary work contributed to the production, collection and circulation of visual culture;
- Import of new materials, technologies and processes of art making from North to South, East to West, or vice a versa;
- Role of print in transmission of motifs, sources and theories of art;
- Art produced by travelling artists, patrons and workshops
Rethinking Ethnographic Surrealism
Chair: Rachel Silveri - University of Florida
Ethnographic surrealism has long been understood as an alternative strand within surrealist practice. Closely associated with Georges Bataille’s DOCUMENTS (1929-30), this dissident surrealism combined an interest in the cultures of Africa and Oceania with the practices of anthropology, fieldwork description, and documentary photography to relativize European culture and hence undermine its supposed normalcy. Spurred by the recent global turn in surrealism studies, the purpose of “Rethinking Ethnographic Surrealism” is twofold. First, this panel will investigate the wide array of ethnographic practices beyond the purview of Bataille’s journal, examining instances of surrealist fieldwork by artists throughout Australia, North America, Europe, and the trans-Caribbean. Second, this panel aims to reevaluate the criticality associated with ethnographic surrealism by insisting on its disciplinary ties to colonialism, for, as Aimé Césaire wrote, “it is the West that studies the ethnography of the others, not the others who study the ethnography of the West.” With this dual approach in mind, this panel welcomes papers on topics including but not limited to: Len Lye’s interest in Maori art and his theorization of the “old brain;” counter-primitivism strategies throughout the Caribbean, in works by Wifredo Lam, René Ménil, Suzanne and Aimé Césaire; Nancy Cunard’s edited collection Negro: An Anthology (1934); Wolfgang Paalen’s work in Mexico; René Mabille’s Haitian Bureau of Ethnology; Kurt Seligmann’s studies of the Tsimshian tribe in British Colombia; Michel Leiris and the Mission Dakar-Djibouti; Antonin Artaud’s writings on the Tarahumara; Matta and Robert Motherwell’s trip to Mexico in 1941; and the self-ethnography of Mass Observation.
Scholars’ Papers: Preservation, Collection, Legacy
Catalogue Raisonné Scholars Association
Chair: Susan J Cooke - Estate of David Smith
Over the course of their careers, many scholars accumulate significant troves of private notes, interviews, photographs, primary and secondary documents, databases, and manuscripts of completed and projected publications. How does a scholar, whether affiliated with an institution or not, ensure that her or his research is not lost? How do institutions and individuals assess the cultural value of such archives? What are some of the practical, financial, and legal issues that can determine whether or how a scholar’s archive is preserved and made available to other scholars or to the general public? These are some of the questions our speakers will address.
Social Practice & Service Learning
Chair: Ellen Mueller - UMass Dartmouth
Chair: Karen Gergely - Graceland University
Email: email@example.com, Gergely1@graceland.edu
Based on feedback from our Teaching and Social Practice roundtable from CAA 2018, we are calling for presentations from artists, designers, and art historians, which examine similarities and differences between social practice and service learning, as well as identifying approaches, tools, and best practices that can be useful for either or both. Further, this panel also welcomes examinations of cross-campus collaborations integrating socially engaged practice, service learning, and other disciplines.
For the purposes of this panel, we will categorize social practice as social engagement and collaboration with individuals, communities, and institutions as a form of participatory art. Service-Learning will be defined as a pedagogical method designed with the mission of student attainment of discipline specific knowledge through creatively designed active learning community-based projects benefitting community members or groups (UMass Dartmouth Leduc Center for Civic Engagement).
Speculative Feminist Futures
Chair: Margaret Hart - University of Massachusetts Boston
Chair: Rachel Epp Buller - Bethel College
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Feminist speculative fiction raises a timely and pertinent question: how can we do things differently? Writers imagine societies that include parthenogenesis, ambisexuality, co-mothering, and other models that overturn heteronormative conventions, imagining that seems especially relevant and even necessary in our current political and social climate. While science fiction is a well-known literary genre, however, artists whose work is informed by similar speculation have received less attention. This panel seeks presentations by artists, historians, and theorists whose art and writing take as foundational the speculative modes employed by feminist science fiction writers. How do artists explore the possible relationship between feminist science fiction, new technologies and a contemporary feminist consciousness? What strategies have artists and writers used to suggest or create new visions for culture and society? What is the relationship between speculative fiction and the emergence of posthumanism? How do artists re-imagine human and more-than-human relations? We welcome all manner of creative and scholarly proposals. Let us imagine together.
State of the Art (History): Engaging Difficult Topics In And Out Of the Classroom
Chair: Parme P. Giuntini - Otis College of Art and Design
From introductory surveys to upper division courses, Art History classes are increasingly sites for discussion of “difficult topics.” Controversies around the removal of Confederate Monuments and the popular activism inspired by movements like #BlackLivesMatter, #MeToo, and #NeverAgain have called attention to inherent bias and systemic racism embedded within our cultural and academic institutions, and within our own disciplinary practices. Addressing these issues often involves projects and applied learning activities that encourage students to engage with the issues beyond the classroom, reinforcing the relevance of Art History to unpacking and critically analyzing the issues involved. Faculty teaching these topics must not only deal with the sensitivities and difficulties of raising controversial issues in the classroom, but also the pedagogical challenges that inevitably occur with a diversity of student positions and the need to be thoughtful and inclusive in order to foster authentic debate. We invite proposals for seven-minute lightning talks on courses, projects, pedagogies, and activities that offer strategies for engaging, fostering, and facilitating discussions on difficult topics at all levels of Art History instruction. The session will be facilitated by ArtHistoryTeachingResources.org (AHTR) in collaboration with Art History That.
Step into the Arena: Aesthetics and Athletics in the
Chair: Jordana Moore Saggese - California College of the Arts
This session explores the intersections of aesthetics and athletics in American visual culture, both thematically and formally. More specifically, how might sport and its representation function as a site for the performance of ideas about identity and difference? In what ways does sports culture hold the potential to complicate the notion of representational visibility in American visual culture contexts? This panel is especially interested in discussing how queers, artists of color, and those with intersectional identities use sport to provoke conversations about race, class, power, and privilege by deploying visual rhetoric(s) of sport. We seek papers and presentations that address the intersections and interventions of sport and art from a critical, historical, or performance practice perspective. Topics of investigation could include: the visual spectacle of sport, representations of the body in pain, the performance of gender, failure, or even the paradox of hyper-visibility for certain types of bodies in sport culture and their political invisibility in broader culture. Submissions by artists, critics, and art historians who are engaged in the interdisciplinary potentialities of athletics are welcome.
Subjugated Bodies and the Other in Art of the Ancient World
Chair: Caitlin Earley - University of Nevada, Reno
Chair: Tara Prakash - Metropolitan Museum of Art
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Artists throughout the ancient world used a variety of visual strategies to negotiate cultural differences. One particularly effective strategy was the depiction of the Other in the form of a subjugated body, such as a captive or war prisoner. This type of imagery played an important role in diverse pre-modern cultures. For example, in ancient Egypt, captive imagery magically enabled the king to perform one of his most fundamental duties, namely the maintenance of Egypt and cosmic order. In Maya culture, subjugated bodies endowed rulers with the right to rule and performed moral narratives for elite audiences. Yet studies of ancient art have typically focused on the representation of powerful bodies at the expense of the disempowered.
This panel seeks contributions that investigate the body of the Other in the art of global pre-modern cultures before 1500 CE. Papers that consider how representations of subjugated bodies negotiated cultural identity; the ability of such imagery to speak to performance and ritual; the ways in which captive bodies interacted with architectural contexts; and the agency of the Other in ancient art are especially welcome. By bringing together scholars working from various cultural perspectives, we hope to initiate conversations across multiple fields of art history and develop innovative methodologies, theoretical models, and approaches for the study of subjugated bodies and the Other in the art of the ancient world.
Supporting Immigrant Artists and Communities
Chair: Michael Royce - New York Foundation for the Arts
Immigrant artists are often extremely vulnerable and marginalized in our large society. Fears of deportation, incarceration and voiceless representation earmark many of their lives. NYFA and its partners in five cities (New York City, Detroit, Newark, Oakland and San Antonio) across the United States are working to impact these communities in positive and significant ways. Many immigrant artists produce work of extremely high caliber, are educated, experienced, and often heralded in their country of origin yet are not able to translate that within the United States. The session will highlight what work is being done, what the challenges are and how we can collectively support the immigrant artist community. The conversation will call upon data gathered from immigrant artists, mentors, professional development experts and organizations to portray the landscape of these communities and suggest recommended steps for empowering immigrant artists with tools, resources, and access to own their rightful place in national conversations, policy making, legislation and their creative processes in the cultural landscape. We are seeking stories of impact from immigrant artists and/or those working with projects or programs designed to sustain immigrant artist communities.
Teaching art entrepreneurship as a new paradigm for the 21st century art schools
Chair: Jacek J. Kolasinski - Florida International University
The National Endowment for the Arts has reported in March 2018 that the arts contributed more than $760 billion to the U.S. economy. There has been a rise in programs that explicitly address the links between creativity and the economy as part of more traditional curricular offerings. This session aims to explore the confluence of entrepreneurship and traditional studio training—often collectively described as “art entrepreneurship.” Entrepreneurship education within academic art and design departments has been introduced into university curricula to prepare graduates to actively participate in the process of building creative economies in our discrete communities. These initiatives have focused on a search for new strategies and prospects to empower young artists and designers to create more sustainable economic futures for themselves and foster their creative energies to re-envision our future and prepare them to solve society’s most pressing challenges. As art entrepreneurship disrupts existing educational paradigms, proposals are welcome that explore new approaches to develop sustainable models for the 21st century art school. Also of interest are proposals that expand and stretch the very meaning of art entrepreneurship. In that vein, proposals are sought from university educators in studio programs as well as a wide variety of creative practitioners including curators within and without intuitional, artists, art historians, art critics, and critical theorists/philosophers.
Teaching Art as Social Action: Pros, Cons,
Radical Art Caucus
Chair: Jeffrey Kasper
Social practice art is an emerging, interdisciplinary field of research and practice that pivots on the arts and humanities while embracing such external disciplines as environmental and labor studies, public architecture, political organizing and activism as well as pedagogy. Its overall objective is not to merely make art that represents socio-political injustice (think Picasso’s Guernica), but to employ the varied forms offered in the expanded field of contemporary art as collaborative, collective, and participatory social method for bringing about real progressive justice and transformation.
This session brings together leading social practice art educators to discuss strategies for teaching socially engaged art. It will offer both a general introduction to the field as well as specific lesson plans and curricula that demonstrate what makes this emerging field unique and of growing interest to artists, historians, critics, theorists, museums and above all teachers of art. Topics to be discussed include creating an “intimate education” for socially-engaged art that takes in consideration the students own social positionality and relation to the world as a starting point to collaborative practice; direct action and alternative organizing; urban imaginaries in art and research; anti-bias work; and collective learning, among others. We are seeking papers or presentations that address these concerns and/or report on successful or failed attempts at teaching art as social action.
Organized by Social Practice Queens (SPQ) at Queens College: Gregory Sholette, Chloe Bass, and Jeff Kasper
Teaching Art History in the Wake of #MeToo
Chair: Cynthia S. Colburn - Pepperdine University
Chair: Ella Julian Gonzalez
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
College art history classes are often the first time students have exposure to a vast array of visual cultures through space and time. The canon of art historical works often covered in these classes is well trodden by professors, and includes many works that depict acts of violence against women including rape, abduction, and murder. The impressive formal qualities of such works are often highlighted in textbooks, and presumably by extension in some classrooms, often at the expense of in-depth discussion of the content and context of such works. This may have the effect of normalizing acts of violence against women in the eyes of our students, violence that, through the lens of art history, is seen to be global and span millennia. In the wake of the #MeToo movement with so many women coming forward about their experiences with sexual harassment and assault, it is crucial to reassess the way we teach and write about the art historically important works that portray violence against women and examine the role the discipline of art history may play in current social movements.
This session welcomes papers from art historians who have been grappling with these issues in their writing and classrooms and have found ways to give voice to the women depicted in such works and open up the discussion of assault against women in these images in a meaningful way that empowers students.
Teaching Art Theory and Criticism in Undergraduate Studio
Chair: Ann Bangsil Kim
While knowledge in contemporary art practices, criticism, and theory is highly stressed in graduate programs and the contemporary art world, many smaller and understaffed undergraduate programs struggle to find the most effective way to develop a Studio Art degree curriculum that is embedded with a rigorous dose of exposure to art theory and criticism. It is standard for Studio Art majors to be required to take art history survey courses and perhaps one course in contemporary art history, but that is rarely the norm in small and medium sized universities with smaller art departments.
What are the best ways to incorporate theory and criticism in undergraduate studio art programs especially when the program does not have an art critic and the studio classes do not seem long enough to have it be embedded into the syllabus? Is it more difficult to do so in courses that focus on more traditional media such as Painting and Drawing compared to New Genres or Social Practice? The session is especially interested in seeking papers from instructors, art critics, and graduate students who can share some of their most successful endeavors in this area.
Teaching Design Studies: Practice, Methods & Resources
Chair: Carla Cesare - University of Cincinnati Blue Ash
Chair: Gretchen Alana Von Koenig - Parsons, The New School
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Design Studies (design history and theory) has reached a critical point in its development. Current resources have developed from art history, having little to do with the design studio experience. The results are students who struggle to engage with the material in these courses, faculty that do not understand the studio experience, and the means to bridge that gap. This panel addresses those issues, the direction of design studies and what can be done in training design historians and theoreticians; the critical engagement of students with the history and theory; and bridging the gap with practice. This panel will question the methods we employ in teaching–content, pedagogy and curricular structure—are they creating a barrier between the course objectives and the students’ ability to translate this knowledge? How can educators engage writing and research into practice-based pedagogy, teaching the value of these skills to the design student? Is the curricular sequencing effective in promoting knowledge transference to other areas of students’ education, or is coursework siloed? Studies reveal that while employers rank “Critical Thinking” as the top skill (above technical skills), only approximately half of graduates possess “proficient” critical thinking skills- a deficit that design studies courses could improve. For a 90-minute session, we propose a mix of presentations and a panel discussion with academics, practitioners, curators, etc. Confirmed invitee panelists are David Raizman and Timo de Rijk our goal is to create a dialogue about the next stage of design studies and the future of resources, pedagogy, and methodology.
Technologies of Counter-Publicity
Chair: Philip Glahn - Tyler School of Art/Temple University
Chair: Cary Levine
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
As computers, digital networks, and social media have become at once extensions of our bodies and selves and ubiquitous mechanisms of power and control, definitions of political action and dissent have grown increasingly blurry. What constitutes resistance in a new-media world? What are the emergent spaces and places for dissent, and how have they impacted preexisting ones? What are the possibilities for technologically oriented artworks to productively confront—and potentially transform—entrenched structures? This panel will examine historical and contemporary examples of artists who have repurposed imaging, communication, or construction technologies to critically engage in the struggle over the organization of individual and social experience. Pirate radio and video-phone networks, agitprop kiosks and temporary shelters, electronic billboards and virtual crowds, guerilla TV and digital archives are just some of the tools used by artists over the past half-century to assess and alter physical and immaterial sites. The creation of alternate arenas of perception, interaction, transition, and memory—forms of “counter-publicity,” to borrow Oskar Negt and Alexander Kluge’s term—has challenged not only existing apparatuses of production and distribution, but the very concepts of the public sphere, democracy, and political participation. Though often overlooked by the histories of art, such work confronts a range of issues facing today’s world of instant communication, digitally saturated sociality and labor, and consolidated corporate control.
Tenochtitlan/Mexico City: New Directions in Iconographic Study
Chair: George L. Scheper - Johns Hopkins University
This session seeks to foreground new approaches to the iconographies of Tenochtitlan and Mexico City in the encounter era -- ranging from pre-Columbian Aztec or Mexica culture on the eve of the Spanish encounter in the 16th century, through indigenous, mestizo and creole Mexican art in the early colonial period. Recent scholarship has drastically changed our perspectives on this era, with new understandings and readings both of post-classic Pre-Columbian art and of Spanish colonial New World Baroque art, and especially, of so-called syncretism and syncretic art, understandings that render obsolete older “idols-behind-altars” interpretations of phenomena such as the tequitqui atrial cross at Acolman. The mixture of Pre-Columbian iconography with European Christian iconography in such artifacts used to approached univocally either as impositions of Christian visual discourse or as signs of indigenous subversion -- rather than as expressions of an inherently interwoven new reality of a cultural world of nepantla or in-betweenness. The session encourages commentary on a variety of artifacts, from indigenous, mestizo and creole-derived architecture, sculpture, painting, featherwork, metalwork, codices, maps, and drawings and other forms of material culture. Papers that seek to explore intercultural and interdisciplinary connections are especially welcome, as are papers that include considerations of how new perspectives on the arts of Mexico in the 15-17th centuries can be most meaningfully incorporated into curricula in art history and the humanities.
Textile Ecologies: Environmental Aesthetics and Transmaterial Dynamics of Cloth
Chair: Sylvia Houghteling - Bryn Mawr College
Chair: Vera-Simone Schulz
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Among the artifacts crafted by humankind, textiles have always held a uniquely interdependent relationship with the environment. Textiles derive from vegetal (linen, cotton), animal (wool, silk) and even mineral origins (as in the case of asbestos fibers). The production of textiles has depended upon access to and the processing of raw materials, while cloth manufacturing has reshaped entire landscapes from the transplantation of mulberry trees for sericulture to the mounds of murex shells discarded after the extraction of purple dye. Textile patterns bloomed with imagery of flora and fauna, while fabrics pervaded myths and metaphors of the natural world, as when the translucency of a veil was likened to fog, and fields of flowers were said to evoke patterned carpets. Textiles have connected distant regions, but they have also been responsible for and complicit in the enslavement of human beings, the exploitation of agricultural, artisanal and industrial labor, and the despoliation of landscapes and water resources. Despite these historical ties, the ecological humanities have mostly neglected the textile realm. This panel welcomes papers that consider the relationship between textiles and the environment from any time period and geographic region and seeks scholars who grapple with the aesthetic dimensions and ecological conditions of cloth. We hope that our panel will aid in rethinking the notion of textility – the word for any phenomenon that has, at its root, the qualities of a textile – across media and materials, and throughout the natural, built and imagined world.
The Anti-Black Interior? Enslavement and Refinement in
Chair: Jennifer C. Van Horn - University of Delaware
Chair: Maurie D. McInnis - University of Texas Austin
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Traditional studies of eighteenth and nineteenth-century luxury goods ignore issues of race and enslavement. Yet, as many scholars have argued, the economic growth fueled by the sale of enslaved people and the labor they provided enabled Europeans and Americans to consume more objects of finer quality and thus to experience luxury. Whether the sugar that sweetened their tea, the cotton used in their clothing, or the mahogany furniture upon which they sat, upper and middle-class consumers benefited from slavery. More directly, many elites owned enslaved people and deployed their labor in domestic spaces. This panel traces enslavement’s penetration of the refined interior and the material and visual responses to slavery that could be found within bourgeois domestic environments. Whether portraits of enslaved attendants, ceramic representations of the four continents, wallpaper decorated with scenes of slavery, or andirons cast in the form of Africans, household objects made compelling arguments about racial identity. What strategies did elite and middling consumers in North America, Great Britain, Europe, and Latin America adopt to domesticate enslavement and how did these strategies manifest in artworks and objects? How did household artifacts negotiate tensions between refinement and brutality or bring these tensions to the fore? In what ways did abolitionists traffic in racialized imagery and artifacts to fight slavery? How might our understanding of eighteenth and nineteenth-century domestic art and objects shift if we bring anti-black concerns to the fore? Finally, what are the stakes for mobilizing these objects today, particularly in museums and historic sites?
The Artist as Public Intellectual: 1968 to Today
Chair: Cara M Jordan - CUNY Graduate Center
Along with increased specialization and the rise of the rapid news cycle, the status of intellectuals in public life has experienced a shift since the mid-20th century. Long populated by social thinkers, literary critics, and philosophers, the public intellectual—once called upon to combat political propaganda with facts and cultural analysis—has now been replaced by an expert talking head. Artists have played an equally active part in public life for millennia, experiencing an apogee around 1968 with figures such as Judy Chicago and Joseph Beuys. Although in recent decades many have abandoned their utopian proclamations in favor of localized action, today’s artists are increasingly seeking methods to generate public debate and address social problems, reviving the tradition of the public intellectual by using art as a mode of cultural critique writ large.
This panel seeks papers that investigate modes of art making that might be considered activities of public intellectualism since the turbulent 1960s in order to identify global phenomena and establish precedents for today’s practitioners. How have artists sought out public methods of and venues for idea production and dissemination with the goal of resisting hegemonic power and/or catalyzing social change? Which strategies were successful (or unsuccessful) and which ideas took hold on a mass scale? How have artists built upon existing activist movements or cultural moments in order to broadcast their ideas? Papers may address individual artists and/or projects, thematic case studies, or curatorial methodologies; artists are also encouraged to present on their own work.
The Critical Voice in Art of the United States 1776–1917
Chair: Janice Simon - University of Georgia
The art of the United States found its identity shaped in part from the critical voices featured in newspapers, popular periodicals, specialty art magazines, and book length manuscripts addressing local and national exhibitions, the emergence of new artistic groups, the works of the individual artist, and the emerging history of a national art. The critical voice in American culture from the formation of the nation itself through the creation of national art academies like the National Academy of Design in 1825 through the development of the professional art critic at the turn of the twentieth century deserves reexamination for its contributions to American artistic production. Proposals are requested for examination of the role of critical discourse in the history of American art from the rise of a national consciousness to the year in which Camera Work ended publication. Papers may consider the role of a specific art periodical or critical reviews in popular magazines, or a specific authorial voice, or even a non-nationalistic point of view in the formation of key critical debates about the role, future, faults, and fears of art exhibited in the United States. Ideally, a full range of perspectives, artistic encounters, historical moments, and critical sources, whether professional or amateur, about a variety of art objects will compose the proposed session that addresses a period less examined than the twentieth and twentieth-first centuries for its contribution of a critical voice in American art.
The Female Impact. Women and the Art Market in the Early Modern Era.
Historians of Netherlandish Art
Chair: Judith Noorman
Chair: Frans Grijzenhout
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Gender studies in art history tend to focus on the role of the woman artist, on the representation of the female body, and the gendered reception of art, contemporary and historical. In this session, however, a different perspective is taken: what was the role of women in commissioning, buying and displaying art and architecture in the early modern era, particularly in the Netherlands? Was it always their husband, father, brother, or even son, who had a final say in the design of exterior and interior decoration, the selection of artists and subjects represented in commissioned works of art?
This question is reasonably well explored in studies on early modern royal and princely mecenate, particularly unmarried or widowed princesses, like Amalia van Solms and Elisabeth of Bohemia. The same goes for that special branch of cultural production that is usually connected to the female sex: the luxurious dolls house, as owned by affluent women like Petronella Oortman. However, despite the fact that women from the urban middle class in the Northern and Southern Netherlands in this age are known to have been relatively independent and well cultured, we know very little about their position within the wider field of artistic production. Why not take a serious look at the commercial activities of Hendrickje who ran an art shop with Rembrandt’s son?
We invite anyone working on the female impact on the artistic climate in the Early Modern era to contribute to this session, either by presenting a spoken contribution or poster.
The Gastronomic Turn: Art and Food Since 1960
Chair: Andrea Gyorody - Allen Memorial Art Museum
Chair: Laura M. Fried
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
Since the 1960s, many artists have turned to food, whether as raw material for art objects; as performance prop; as a means to create sociability; as a consumer product; or as a vehicle to address social injustice and to nurture sustainability. Emerging from Pop, Conceptualism, Fluxus, and Happenings, such gestures—which today continue in the fields of relational aesthetics, social practice art, and performance—centralize foodstuffs and the shared meal to radically different ends, with some artists prioritizing aesthetic and conceptual concerns, and others foregrounding environmental, economic, and political change. For the last half century, food as a genre of art-making has proven capacious enough to encompass Alison Knowles’ Identical Lunch, Miralda’s Breadline, Rirkrit Tiravanija’s Thai dinners, Michael Rakowitz’s Enemy Kitchen food truck, and Fallen Fruit’s tree-planting initiatives, though it has not (yet) generated a diverse and rigorous body of scholarly literature. This panel seeks to address that lacuna, and we welcome papers—from artists, academic art historians, curators, and others—that deeply consider food-based artworks as they relate to a wide spectrum of themes, including but not limited to sociability; sustainability; ephemerality; decay; the grotesque; sustenance; hospitality; social justice; cultural diplomacy; the senses, sensuality, and synesthesia; taste (literally and metaphorically); class, and issues of inclusion and exclusion; conceptualism and the ontology of art; and the role of arts institutions, commercial galleries, and foundations in facilitating what we are calling “the gastronomic turn.”
The Impact and Dimensions of Artists’ Estates: Practical, Economic, Emotional, Creative
Chair: Mira Friedlaender - Bilge Friedlaender Estate
Through a diverse group of voices, this panel seeks to expand dialogues around artists’ estates and the politics of legacy. Artists or their heirs must eventually confront the material fate of artworks, oeuvres, and collections. The specific circumstances and stakeholders of an estate can drive decisions which in turn inform art history, the art market, and even studio practice. With an aging baby boom and unprecedented art market, artists’ legacy planning, or lack there of, has a profound impact on art history itself. How do living artists, art historians, and artists’ estates approach the myriad emotional and logistical issues surrounding legacy? How does the popular focus on a few large artists’ foundations skew the discourse of a growing and idiosyncratic legacy field? If managing the artists’ estate is a creative process, what can students learn and what can be taught? Presentations engaging the affective dimension of artists’ estates, practical art logistics, creative approaches to estates, and case studies from artists who have a long-term plan for their work, are most welcome. Executors, art lawyers, art historians, conservators, archivists, studio managers, and museum workers are also encouraged to participate. We aim to create a lively panel with short presentations and much conversation.
The Intersectionality of Art, Feminism, Postcolonialism,
Chair: Judith K. Brodsky - Rutgers, The State University of
Chair: Ferris Olin - Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
In our research on, and analysis of the leadership styles and impact of women artist/activists, museum administrators, art historian activists, and art entrepreneurs, what emerged was the fact that when women hold policy level jobs in institutions, become activists, or introduce new concepts into art, art history, and curatorial practice, their presence changes institutions, studio practice, and even the discipline of art history. As discussed by Heather Iglioliorte, the only PhD in Canada who is Inuk, in her Art Journal article (Volume 76, 2017, Issue 2) our understanding of art changes when the interpretation of art is based on the cultural position of the artist rather than on neocolonial intellectual structures of art history. Iglioliorte’s discussion focuses on how the art of indigenous peoples is viewed through the lens of the Western art canon because the sovereignty of museums is still mostly held by white European-descended curators, directors, and art educators. Analogously, we know that women artists were denigrated until the Feminist Art Movement of the 1970s initiated the changes that brought more women into positions of influence through their activism, innovations in art practice, curatorial efforts, critical writing, and leadership positions at museums. We invite artists, critics, and art historians who are thinking about the intersectionality of art, feminism, postcolonialism, and sovereignty to submit papers.
The Place of Art. The Re-defininition of the Exhibition Format in the 70s
Chair: Clarissa Ricci - Iuav, University in Venice
Critically reflecting on the history of exhibition and the canonization of its formats, this panel aims to investigate the development of the exhibitionary complex as it’s known today. Political protests in the 70s occupied the whole public sphere, causing an epochal value change across culture, thought and politics. The process of democratization affecting cultural perceptions also impacted the art system. Many demonstrations, often in the form of interventions and performances, occurred as throughout the opening dates of the Venice Biennale. While changing the functioning of its apparatuses, the exhibitionary complex (Bennet 1982) continued to provide instruments for the moral and cultural regulation. In their ability to mobilize and represent political exigencies of a specific moment in time, exhibitions became more specialised thanks to the adoption of diverse formats like biennials, fairs, temporary museum exhibitions, forums and books. None of these models were new but, during the 70s, were used to respond to the needs of an expanding cultural sphere. Cologne and Basel’s art fairs, the exhibition choices made by Seth Siegelaub in January 5-31 1969 (New York 1969), and documenta 5, which opened the second wave of biennials (Green and Gardner 2016), are great example of these radical changes in exhibition’s formats. We invite scholars to submit papers that examine specific exhibition formats which, during the 1970s, underwent a significant redefinition or explored methodological issues related to such topic.
The Politics of Independence: European Neoclassicism and Latin American Identity
Chair: Martina E. Meyer - Stanford University
Chair: Susan J. Douglas
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
During the eighteenth-century, Europeans introduced the neoclassical style to their Latin American colonies through art schools, such as the Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Carlos in imitation of the Royal Academies of France and Spain. These institutions normalized the distinction between civilized and primitive perpetuating a hierarchy of cultural dominance that favoured European aesthetics. However, after the wars of independence this relationship became increasingly problematic. Neoclassicism continued to be favoured by government-run art academies, although the style was often used to render indigenous themes. For example, in 1851 the Catalan artist Manuel Vilar portrayed Tlahuicol in plaster, in a style reminiscent of the Hellenistic Greek Laocoön group. Visual culture acts not as a mirror that reflects national identity, but rather a complex venue for its interpretation – a site through which populations come into consciousness as members of particular and discrete communities. How did French neo-classicism become an instrument of Latin American identity and a means of nation building post-independence c.1820? How was this style appropriated and adapted for nationalist ends and in which specific contexts? In what ways did the style offer a point of resistance and subversion for post-colonial narratives? This panel seeks papers exploring questions of race, ethnicity and social hierarchy in the arts with a particular emphasis on how newly independent South American regions adopted and adapted European visual culture in ways that asserted their cultural, political, and national maturity at a time when Neoclassicism was dominating the humanities in Europe and Latin America.
The Practice and the Other Practice: The Relationship Between Making Art and Teaching
Chair: Courtney Lynn McClellan
Chair: Coe Lapossy
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
This panel intends to address the contingent or contentious relationship between a studio practice and a teaching practice. Rarely addressed professionally, but often spoken about privately, this public dialogue attempts to bridge the theory of pedagogy with the day-to-day actions of a working artist who teaches. Looking to models like John Baldessari or Frances Stark who address teaching in their work, alongside the work of an artist like Paul Thek, who is known for his educational strategies, the panel will unpack how artists teach. Participating artists are encouraged to include images, methods, and storytelling, in order to ground the conversation in anecdotal evidence. Panelists might speak to topics like: school as a context for making work, personal identity as an artist/educator, lessons learned in the studio and classroom, or interrelated challenges of the art and academic markets. More than simply seeking balance, how do these practices work in concert, or at times, compete for one’s attention? What does the precarity or assurance of one profession provide to the other? From a position of inquiry, we ask, how does your work as an educator influence what you do in your studio? And, how does your work as an artist impact your performance as a teacher?
The Practice of Fashion: Designing the American Body
Chair: Emma McClendon - The Museum at the Fashion Institute of Technology
Chair: Lauren Elizabeth Peters
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
What constitutes a “good” or a “bad” body in American culture? How have bodily ideals evolved over the last century? What contributes to our understanding of the American body, and what is the relationship between the American body and the ready-to-wear fashion industry? In exploring these questions, this interdisciplinary panel will examine how the fashion industry—a complex system of interconnected sectors, through which garments go from conception to consumption—constructs body image ideals. It will focus on fashion as a design practice in order to redress the scholarly focus that is typically placed on fashion magazines and runway shows in the consecration of bodily norms. Going beyond glossy magazine editorials and runway presentations, this panel invites papers to consider how fashion objects reify certain body types at the expense of others. Paper proposals may include, but are not limited to, discussions of how garments are designed, manufactured, sized, constructed, sold, worn, and even preserved within the American fashion system over the long twentieth century. In framing the American body as a dressed body, papers are encouraged to consider how fashion and dress objects can react to, challenge, celebrate, or reinforce normative body ideals from diverse perspectives on race, class, size, age, ability, and gender identity.
“The Problem of Woman” in Surrealism
Chair: Alyce A. Mahon - University of Cambridge
Chair: Katharine Conley
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
In a 1990 interview, the American Surrealist Dorothea Tanning stated “Women artists. There is no such thing – or person. It’s just as much a contradiction in terms as ‘man artist’ or ‘elephant artist.’ You may be a woman and you may be an artist; but the one is a given and the other is you.” Leonor Fini also believed the label ‘woman artist’ to be a “false country”, and Frida Kahlo famously stated that she painted her “own reality”, that it could not be subsumed into a collective identity. Yet Tanning, Fini and Kahlo were amongst those artists celebrated in Peggy Guggenheim’s pioneering Exhibition by 31 Women (1943). The press release for that show declared it to be “testimony to the fact that the creative ability of women is by no means restricted to the decorative vein” – an exhibition that so outraged the Time magazine critic James Stern that he stated, “women should stick to having babies.”
For this session, we invite papers that investigate the use-value of ‘woman’ as a label for female artists identified with Surrealism, given that they resisted gender boundaries but participated in a movement which obsessively returned to what André Breton called the “problem of woman.” The panel will examine this issue as a question of art history while recognizing that it has continuing relevance and urgency in art today.
The Production of Public Space: Women Artists in Performance across the Globe
Chair: Joanna Matuszak - Bucknell University
Public spaces have been sites for performances by women artists since the early twentieth century. In the 1960s women avant-garde artists navigated urban spaces, merging art and life. Since the 1970s, inspired by civil rights, ideas of feminist and queer movements, and critiques of colonialism and globalization, women artists have continued to diversify the ethos and praxis of performance art in urban spaces. Four women speakers will discuss the practice of performance art in public spaces and its future development. What strategies and tactics can women artists use to make their voices heard in the public realm, especially in regions with open or covert censorship? With oppression, war, and genocides—aided by natural disasters—rampant in the Middle East, Africa, and South America, and anti-immigratory isolationist politics growing in Europe and United States, how can women’s performance art speak? What voices do women artists express—universal or local—as they travel to perform in cities around the world? In recent decades public spaces across the globe have seen rising activist movements and demonstrations with the vital presence of women protesters. In this volatile city landscape, what is the role of women’s performance art, and what is its relationship to the growing art form of artivism? What visual vocabulary is being developed by women artists performing in streets and in squares? The panel discussion will address conditions of and challenges to women’s performance art practice in public spaces and trajectories of future inquiry.
The Role and Impacts of the Arts in Research Universities: Learning from Interdisciplinary Teams
Alliance for the Arts in Research Universities
Chair: Gabriel Harp - The Alliance for the Arts in Research Universities (Please contact Maryrose Flanigan for
This session aims to represent the many and diverse ways interdisciplinary work takes place. It’s for those reflecting on how they collaborate at the intersections of disciplines. This includes researchers, scholars, and practitioners engaged in arts-inclusive collaborations that lie within and beyond the academy, but which at some point in their process depend on academic review in the establishment of rigor and impact. We want to surface ways in which the arts play a role and impact work at the research university. Presenters will explore how working in interdisciplinary teams has transformed their practice, research or teaching; led to new audiences and provided breakthroughs and to answer the question of how these collaborations have driven interdisciplinary research. This session will examine research-based, interdisciplinary collaborations through rigorously peer-reviewed presentation of arts-inclusive work, and guided reflection on the processes that support them. It aims to connect a robust, critical community of practice in support of such work, while sharing best practices for interdisciplinary collaboration to ever wider spheres of practice in and beyond higher education. We will collect, present, and discuss: Mature projects with arts-inclusive focus, interdisciplinary, with at least part of it has a research component, with external recognition elsewhere; highlight innovative outcomes that have impact; and that impact is validated by another venue; provide hallmarks of innovative process(es) that leads to new modes of interdisciplinary production; and that demonstrate an understanding of context and precedent.
The Spectacle in Art from the Panorama to the Infinity Room
Chair: Jason Rosenfeld - Marymount Manhattan College
Chair: Timothy J. Barringer - Yale University
Email: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
This session seeks to explore the evolution of “Spectacle Art” from the creation of a broad public for viewing art in a novel format in the Panorama, first conceived by Robert Barker in Britain in 1787, to the phenomenal success of contemporary artists such as James Turrell, Christian Marclay, Yayoi Kusama, Kara Walker, Olafur Eliasson, and Random International, and their creation of collective, sharable, often immersive experiences. The panel aims to interrogate the idea of “spectacle,” and connotations of visual conspicuousness, collective memory, and conceptual extravagance. It privileges the new and the communal, in multiple formats and scales, from the panorama viewing platform to the enveloping spaces of installation art. A related theme is the emergence of popular audiences for art. Immersive displays offer alternative narratives to complement Tom Crow’s classic account of salon exhibitions as sites for the formation of a modern viewing public. We sketch a parallel history wherein art-as-spectacle generates a mass audience. Papers may focus on strategies of the spectacular in all media. A fundamental text for our discussion is Guy Debord’s The Society of the Spectacle, a predictive illumination of the tentacular reach of malevolent capitalism through media, art, celebrity, and experiential aspects in our now-global culture. This panel asks how art history, rather than media studies or media archaeology, can examine large-scale installations. We welcome a broad spectrum of papers engaging with the politics and poetics of modern and contemporary visual arts, performance, and media strategies that surround the viewer to spectacular effect.
The Studio as Market
International Art Market Studies
Chair: Julie F. Codell
Artists’ studios have been the site of workshops, collaboration, promotion, mystery, and myth, at times considered a hallowed space, at other times a disreputable one. They have also been the places of social, political, and economic transactions that shape aesthetic values. In the studio artists self-fashioned their social status and promoted their works. They invited critics, dealers, and patrons into their studios turning studios into sites that combined a presumed mysterious creative energy with economic exchange while purposely misapprehending economic considerations. This session will explore how artists from the eighteenth century on under dwindling church and aristocratic patronage strategically entered the “free” market by using their studios to promote and sell works in conjunction with creating marketable public identities to engage buyers and generate symbolic capital for their name and their work. Topics can include the nature and function of the studio in the free market, artists’ strategies to both engage in economic activities and misrecognize economics in the studio, the studio as a site of conflicts over agency in overlapping aesthetic and economic transactions or as an exhibitionary site to display the creative process itself, the studio’s combined production and reception functions, among other topics. Send your complete submission materials to Julie Codell, Arizona State University, at firstname.lastname@example.org
The Technology Divide: Tensions Between the Hand, New Media and Studio Art Pedagogy
Chair: Jason A. Swift
This session is organized by Integrative Teaching International (ITI) to gather participants in a platform for collaborative research, discussion, and investigation of practices and philosophies identifying innovative approaches that address the impact of technology and new media upon higher education in the arts, creative practices and the tensions between slow art, the digital generation and studio art pedagogy. The session panel is modeled after the breakout sessions of ITI’s ThinkCatalyst and ThinkTank events. Each panelist will give a brief introduction on a topic, concept or philosophy applicable to current trends and tensions between slow art and the growing reliance upon emerging technologies that negate or challenge the hand (slow art) in studio art pedagogy and practice. Then, a collaborative discussion to generate ideas, content, challenges and new approaches will take place with the session attendees. The session chair will organize the documentation of these discussions with the end goal to produce new content (both theoretical and applied) that results from the collaborative discussions between panelists, facilitators and the session attendees. Interested panelists should send a proposal of the topic or concept they intend to present and mediate for this session. Please also indicate your experience or interest in this topic. For more information on ITI, please visit our website: http://www.integrativeteaching.org and follow us on Facebook or Instagram @itithinktank.
The Versatile Artist
Historians of Eighteenth-Century Art and Architecture
Chair: Daniella Berman - New York University IFA
Chair: Jessica Lynn Fripp - Texas Christian University
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
From Pier Leone Ghezzi’s exploration of caricature, to Angelica Kauffman’s and John Flaxmann’s collaborations with the Wedgewood manufactory, to Jacques-Louis David’s stylistic reactions to the uncertain politics of the French Revolution, artists throughout the long eighteenth century worked in a variety of media and across genres, regardless of established or perceived hierarchies. This panel proposes to explore the conditions–social, political, historical, economic–that inspired, rewarded, or demanded artistic versatility. We welcome papers that focus on individual artists or broader cultural movements in ways that bring to light the myriad forms of artistic versatility across the global eighteenth century (1680-1830) and interrogate the expectations surrounding artistic productivity and creativity. Paper topics might consider, but are not limited to, new constraints or opportunities created by:
- The changing conditions of the (art) market
- Historical/political contingency
- Social strictures and pressures
- Geographic displacements
- Religious transformations
- The role of intermediality
The Visual Culture of Art History Teaching
Chair: Jean E. Robertson - Indiana Univ - Herron School of Art and Design
The teaching of art history has involved an evolving array of visual technologies over centuries, including drawings by people who could travel to see art in person, engraved reproductions of such drawings, black-and-white photographs, color photographs, lantern slides, 35 mm slides, film and video documentation, digital slides, and the great array of computer-mediated tools available today. The nature of research and learning has been impacted by the ability to travel, access to illustrations and libraries of books and slides, and access to computer databases and sophisticated software. How do the media and databases used to teach art history condition methodologies, pedagogy, and curriculum? What is gained when the visual culture of art reproduction and illustration makes a substantial shift to new tools? What, if anything, is lost or lessened? What new or different questions and forms of interaction with art are enabled? How does a shift to new tools change how a “real” experience of art connects to seeing it in reproduction? How is teaching keeping pace with changing mediums of making art? This session invites proposals for papers that reflect on any or all of these questions, considering technologies of art historical illustration from any period on any topic. Papers that draw on the presenter’s own experiences in teaching are welcome as long as the paper considers the social and cultural impact of various visual technologies, and/or addresses theories about the conditioning of art historical learning by the available visual culture.
Trans Representations: Intersectional Gender Identities in Contemporary Art and Visual Culture
Chair: Ace Lehner
“Trans Representations: Intersectional Gender Identities in Contemporary Art and Visual Culture” brings together work made by trans and gender-nonconforming artists and visual culture producers across a variety of media and approaches. Mainstream representations of trans people may shift over time, but they primarily demonstrate which trans constituencies are impermissible, narrowly present acceptable ways of being trans, and sideline the majority of actual trans experiences. In North American and European contexts, for instance, mainstream culture regularly forward trans representations that reflect dominant cultural ideals embracing cis-normative, heteropatriarchal, and white-supremacist ideologies. Because of this reductive trend in mainstream culture trans, and gender-nonconforming self-representations play a vital role in the negotiation of identity formations. Trans representations as a field confound how we have come to think of gender binary and fixed), representations (fixed stand-ins for the person imaged) and identity constituencies (essentialized and static). When trans and gender-nonconforming people self-represent new ways to conceptualize identity, gender and representation emerge. Drawing together a diversity of scholarly and artistic methods to explore in depth nuanced practices interrogating trans and gender-nonconforming experiences this panel considers the complexity of trans and gender-nonconforming representation today. This panel reveals that there are a plethora of ways of being trans and gender-nonconforming, that gender is a malleable matrix, intersecting with racialization, class and various other identity categories. Bringing together a diversity of representations and approaches, this panel seeks to engage the shared commonalities and various specificities of trans and gender-nonconforming self-images and politics across media geography, gender, class, and racialization.
Transnationalism and Sculpture in the Long Nineteenth-Century (ca. 1785-1915)
Association of Historians of 19th-Century Art
Chair: Roberto C Ferrari - Columbia University
Chair: Tomas Macsotay - Universitat Pompeu Fabra
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
The history of nineteenth-century art is frequently presented as the product of revolutions and socio-political changes. The Zeitgeist for nationalism and imperial expansion generated by these historic events inevitably fostered interest in national schools of art criticism and artistic practice. But rising interest in global studies has led to more and more evidence of the transnational as a major impact on artistic practice of the nineteenth century, specifically in association with the creation and dissemination of narratives of national identity, and the interests of economic and colonial expansion. The transnational is defined as crossing national boundaries, but for this session transnationalism also refers to culturally blended nexuses of artistic creativity and engagement during the century. Evidence of this artistic practice is arguably best evident in the creation and display of sculpture, particularly public sculpture because it requires large studios with teams of workers to create, and it occupies spaces that force an encounter with the viewer. Examples of proposals for this session on transnationalism and sculpture in the long nineteenth century might include: sculptors’ studios in Rome dominated by Americans and Europeans, and their practiciens and pupils from other nation-states; monuments incorporating multi-cultural imagery; public statues of monarchs made by local artists in the colonies, potentially inscribed by the politics and hierarchies thereof; and the commingling of sculpture made by native and foreign artists at academies and international exhibitions. Papers on individual artists and works of art are welcome, but they should focus on the larger issue of transnationalism.
Troubling Inheritances: Reworking Cultural Mythologies
Chair: Letha C. Ch’ien - Sonoma State University
Chair: Jennifer L. Shaw
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
We all find ourselves in possession of troubling inheritances. Conscious and unconscious thought structures, cultural stories, myth, religious beliefs, and history shape our understandings of the world. Mythic stories structure human experience, but myths themselves are not immutable or fixed. Embarking from Roland Barthes’ expansive definition of myth this panel explores the ways artists and art historians trouble received ideas as they rework myth. Such reworking has taken on new urgency as mythologies about sexuality, gender, race and nation are troubled by #MeToo, LGBTQ movements, Black Lives Matter, Never Again, DACA, Refugees are Welcome Here, etc are debated and visualized. Images potently receive andcreate cultural mythologies, but simultaneously provide a site for active engagement and reworking. We are interested in how imagery of oppressive mythologies are radically reworked in the realm of visual arts. Examples of such profound reworkings include early modern representations of Judith and Holofernes, William Blake’s transformations of biblical, eddic and mythological stories in the Prophetic Books, Claude Cahun and Marcel Moore’s queer reimaginings of classical Greece, or Carrie Mae Weems’s Framed by ModernismandMandingo. We encourage the submission of papers, artwork, or perfomances that trouble dominant mythologies from all global traditions, historical or contemporary, hybrid, mainstream or marginal.
Twentieth-Century Design and the Immigrant Professional in the Americas
Chair: Laura M. McGuire - University of Hawaii at Manoa
Although the significant contributions of European designers who fled Nazi Europe for North and Latin America have been long recognized by historians, the broader situation of immigrant professionals--from across the globe--in twentieth-century design history remains an area ripe for scholarly examination. This session seeks to complicate and enrich our understanding of the roles of immigrant commercial, industrial, and decorative designers in the Americas. As newcomers either by choice or by force, immigrant professionals faced singular challenges as they sought to adapt to their adopted lands. To what degrees did the economic, ethnic, and professional difficulties they encountered shape the products of American design, design practice, and design culture? To these ends, papers might examine not only immigrants’ professional strategies and successes but also their challenges and failures. How did social, economic, and personal hardships, such as racism, discrimination, and cultural politics affect their professional labors? Did the ideas and methodologies that they brought with them sometimes fail to translate in their new professional, cultural, and aesthetic spheres, and if so, what can these reveal about the history of twentieth-century American design? Alternatively, how have some immigrant designers or immigrant groups proposed concepts that fundamentally challenged and altered the status quo? From a historiographic perspective, how have dominant histories of design hindered a more nuanced history of the American immigrant experience? Papers that examine lesser-known practitioners are particularly welcome, as are papers that interrogate the works of canonical designers from a perspective that highlights their status as immigrants.
Using OERs for Teaching and Research
Chair: K Andrea Rusnock - I.U.S.B.
Chair: Rebecca Jeffrey Easby
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Sponsored by CAA’s Education Committee, this session will look at current issues in the development, integration, and ongoing debate on the use of OERs (Open Education Resources) in the teaching of studio art, design, and art history. As more institutions consider the move toward OERs, Zero (or Reduced) Textbook Cost course policies, and funding initiatives that encourage faculty to develop open access content, instructors must ask new questions about how reliance on these materials might affect both their teaching practice and student learning in their classes. We seek presentations that will provide a broad overview of this topic from diverse perspectives including administrators, content-providers, librarians, students, and faculty in art and art history who have experience with OERs.
Questions might include: What are the advantages and concerns surrounding the use of OERs? What materials (online textbooks, MOOCs, archival resources) exist and are being used? How are they accessed or vetted for quality and academic rigour? How should faculty development of OERs be compensated and positioned alongside institutional expectations for scholarly activity and publication? What evidence exists about their effectiveness, and their promise of greater accessibility to meet students’ needs? How might their use require or suggest changes in pedagogies of art, art history, and other related subjects? How might changes in net neutrality impact use of OERs in higher education? Our goal for this session is to increase awareness, stimulate discussion, and explore the implications of the growing body of OERs available for teaching and research in visual arts education.
Utopia envisions a better and often radically different world, while simultaneously presenting a powerful form of critique and resistance to the existing order of culture, politics and social life. Within the last decade, the contemporary art and design world has witnessed an intensely renewed interest in such ideas, with the emergence of practices that are themselves utopian and that take the history of utopia as their subject. While utopia is future-oriented to the extent that it posits a world not yet realized, it is equally invested in the revelation and recreation of an idealized, prelapsarian and anti-modern vision of the past. Looking beyond the prevailing Marxist and modernist discourses that have largely dictated the critical framework of this topic, this panel invites proposals addressing the anti-modern, transcendental, visionary and apocalyptic imaginings of utopia, particularly within the United States since the 1800s. While our panel is seeking historical and contemporary art and design topics, we are also invested in filtering the problems and promise of utopia through the lens of the current socio-political climate. Potential topics include: utopian literature, theory and pedagogy; collectivism and intentional communities; freed slave communes and social reform of the mid-1800s (ie. Timbuktu, New York, and other landed experiments); utopia, psychedelia, and the counter-culture; apocalypse and millenarianism in contemporary art; visionary art and technology; mysticism and mesmerism; agrarian communes, animism and nature cults; mental utopias, consciousness and alternative realities; the spiritual and religious foundations to utopian practices, past and present.
Visions of Mexico and the Iberian Peninsula
American Society for Hispanic Art Historical Studies
Chair: Jeffrey A. Schrader
In the quincentennial of the meeting of Moctezuma II and Hernán Cortés in Tenochtitlan, this panel seeks to assess the entwined histories of Mexico and the Iberian Peninsula. From the outset, the encounter of the American and European civilizations unfolded around the experience of art and architecture. The initial Spanish amazement at the wonders of Mexico served as the foundation for endeavors on the spectrum of exchange and engagement.
Papers may examine a range of themes at any time in Ibero-Mexican relations. Prospective topics include the early circulation of artworks, the Spanish importation and display of images from the New World, the development of a common visual culture, court art, artists who made the transatlantic journey, and the global reach of the network formed by representatives of peninsular Spain and of Mexico. The objective of the panel is to consider the distinctive art historical legacy of these civilizations at a time when globalization has led to increasing contact among far-flung lands.
Visualizing Scientific Thinking and Religion in the Early Modern Iberian World
Chair: Brendan C. McMahon
Chair: Emily Floyd
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
In recent years, the consideration of visual and material sources has greatly enriched the study of a wide range of scientific practices in the early modern period. As scholars have moved away from characterizing “art” and “science” as discrete categories, they have increasingly turned to paintings, prints, and other forms of artistic production as a means to explore how early modern actors came to understand their experiences of the natural world.
While the vast majority of these studies focus on the visual and material culture of Protestant Northern Europe, a small but growing number investigate similar trends in Spain and the Spanish Americas. Yet even as scholars have turned to instances where visual thinking formed a central component of scientific practices in this region, they have been more tentative to consider how religion, and particularly Catholicism, shaped such practices in this context.
This session seeks papers that consider the intersections of visual production, scientific thinking, and religion in the early modern Iberian world, investigating such themes as:
- Material culture, techne, and artisanal epistemologies
- The mobilization of indigenous American and creole systems of natural knowledge
- The Catholic Enlightenment
- Healing, disease, and visual production
- Visual and material culture, theology, and natural philosophical argument
- Epistemic images in the early modern Iberian world
Walking Out of Class: Putting the “Ped” in Pedagogy
Chair: Carol N. Padberg - Nomad/9 MFA, Hartford Art School
Our world needs artists who can skillfully address the social, ecological, economic and cultural complexities of the 21stcentury. Considering that art provides effective conceptual tools for exploring and framing complex ideas, we’ll consider the impact and benefits of an expanded pedagogy. More and more, art educators are “walking out” to make space for radical creativity and teaching. This panel addresses educational strategies for interdisciplinary fieldwork, community engagement, collaboration, service learning, and more. These strategies thrive outside of the academic bubble, often in unconventional places. With new technologies that support distance learning, even the term “outside of the classroom” is being redefined. While best practices for teaching students in the studio and art history classrooms are well known, the emergent pedagogy of the “living classroom” is still developing. How can we provide students with more opportunities to better understand their own perceptions of the world and how they act within it? How do we foster critical thinking in the fast-moving environment of “real life” field work? What are the ethics of this new educational philosophy? By providing examples of pedagogy on the move, we will consider benefits – and challenges – for art students, teachers, and institutions, as we take another look at the practice of walking out. Join us as we discuss where we have been and where we go from here. Comfortable shoes recommended!
What do you show when there’s nothing to show?: Social practice and the gallery
Chair: Nancy Jane Nowacek
Chair: Allison Rowe
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Socially-engaged art is no longer a new genre: it has become a codified form through granting mechanisms, graduate and undergraduate art programs, and taken up by the majority of arts institutions, if not championed by them over the past 10 years. However there is a mismatch between the standard modality of museums and the forms socially-engaged artworks take. There is a representational problem in the museological display of socially engaged art. The forms through which participatory projects are typically shared —wall text and photo, video documentation—often underrepresent the process, performance, context, and relational engagement of this form of practice. Exhibitions of socially-based works are frequently relegated to hallways or educational centers instead of galleries or other main stage spaces in formal institutional contexts. In effect, this creates project representation in which the social aspects ‘social practice’ are absent. We are two socially-based artist/curators working in participatory contexts and deeply committed to exhibition practices of the field. The goal of this panel is to gather and present strategies for disseminating this form of art that are not mere photo documentation, (excessive) wall text, or long-form video. Furthermore we aim to derive ways that institutions might better support and facilitate the exhibition of participatory practices.
What is American? Exploring Iberian Contact Zones in the “New World”
Chair: Naomi Hood Slipp - Auburn University at Montgomery
Chair: Mark Anthony Castro
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Increasing scholarship has focused attention on the ways in which Iberian colonialization and trade in Latin America, South America, and Asia shaped works of art and material culture, thereby establishing a Spanish and Portuguese syncretic or hybridized aesthetic. In addition, the influence of Catholicism produced unique visual objects that were both indigenous and Iberian. In contrast, less work has been done to consider how Iberian exploration and colonization of North America – specifically the territories of present-day Canada, the United States, and the Caribbean – effected the arts and culture of those regions. This panel identifies these spaces as “contact zones,” which Mary Louise Pratt defines as “Social Spaces where cultures meet, clash, and grapple with each other, often in contexts of highly asymmetrical relations of power, such as colonialism, slavery, or their aftermaths.”We therefore seek papers on works of art, architecture, or material and visual culture, that will illuminate the histories of Spanish and Portuguese colonialization in these territories, chart encounters between Iberian explorers, settlers, and indigenous residents, or consider trade networks with other colonial powers. We are particularly interested in projects that highlight a multiplicity of cultural viewpoints, such as those that consider encounters between indigenous communities and multiple colonial powers within one region, or address understudied regions: the Portuguese influence in Labrador and Newfoundland, the Spanish influence in Florida, Georgia, Alabama, and the Pacific Northwest, or contemporary work that grapples with these legacies.
Mary Louise Pratt, “Arts of the Contact Zone,” Profession(1991): 34 (page span: 33-40).
What is Photography?
Chair: Andres Mario Zervigon - Rutgers University
What is photography? The question is deceptively simple. At the time of its origins, photography had no word. Instead, its makers and advocates devised awkward metaphors, such as “sun picture” and “pencil of nature,” before finally settling on the now familiar “photography.” But disagreement continued as to whether or not it was a technology, an image type, a practice, an enhancer of perception, time caught still or, in the words of Oliver Wendell Holmes, “form itself.” Today the identity of photography sizzles as a hot topic of debate, particularly as digital technologies render this thing both radically ubiquitous but strangely unfamiliar, and global inquiries reveal distinct conceptualizations.
This session inquires broadly into evolving understandings of photography’s identity. It takes as a touchstone some of the most recent inquiries that have thought beyond “the index” as that catchall understanding of what this thing is. It calls, for instance, on Geoffrey Batchen’s proposal that photography is a conception derived from an economy of desires and ideologies, Ariella Azoulay’s suggestion that photography is the larger set of conditions and actions around the print itself (“the photographic situation”), and Stephen Sprague’s revelation that the photograph may often be a sacral object more than an image type, as in Nigeria’s Yorubaland. A panel of 4 short (10-minute) papers by scholars from varied fields, would tease out the meanings of photography that have gathered the most currency around the world. The long discussion to follow, moderated by the convener, would then set these understandings into dialogue.
When Home Won’t Let You Stay: Art and Migration in the 21st Century
Chair: Ruth E. Erickson - Institute of Contemporary Art, Boston
Chair: Ellen Tani - Institute of Contemporary Art, Boston
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
This session considers how contemporary artists and curators have responded to the migration, immigration, and displacement of peoples, and how they have uniquely envisioned the sites and experiences of transit. Throughout history, people have moved around the globe for a variety of reasons—fleeing war, religious persecution, and environmental disaster, or seeking better social and economic circumstances. The twenty-first century continues to witness mass migrations of people from the Middle East, North Africa, and Central America within those regions and to Europe and the United States, which has precipitated several “refugee crises.” This session invites papers that address the varied and complicating roles that artists, curators, and artworks play in negotiating space and identity in migration. Convened during a moment of intense focus on migration—as Tania Bruguera notes, “Immigrants are the subject of the twenty-first century”—it seeks to address a series of questions: What is the nature of representation in artwork about migration? (Does it tell stories? Does it document experiences? Does it imagine futures?) What work can aesthetic practices truly carry out in solving the plight of migrants? How have institutions negotiated their own power in concert with exhibitions about migration? And how have art historians and theorists chronicled this phenomenon, from what T.J. Demos sees as the documentary possibilities of “the migrant image” to Ranajit Guha’s understanding of “the migrant’s time”? By bringing together differing perspectives and case studies from throughout the world, this session interrogates the concept of globalized, twenty-first century transience.
Where Industry Meets Academia: Who is Leading the Pack in Design Research and Why?
Committee on Design
Chair: Daniel J. Wong
Is industry making the greatest contribution and impact to design, or is research in the academy doing it behind the scenes? Is it time for more PhD programs in design?
This panel discussion will span design disciplines. We invite academic design researchers, design practitioners, agency principals, and design entrepreneurs to participate in this discussion of the investment in design research and the establishment of contemporary design thinking, methodologies, and technologies.
Why Art Matters: Art History’s Response to the Changing
Chair: Gwen Robertson - The Colburn School
Chair: Aandrea Stang
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Art and artists matter in this world now more than ever. But have you ever been asked to explain why this is true and found yourself at a loss for words, falling back on clichés or academic truisms to assert value (cultural or other)? At a time when the separation between artists and curator, art historian and art activist is blurred (consider staffing and programming crises at MOCA, Los Angeles, The Whitney, The Contemporary Museum St. Louis, and most recently The Brooklyn Museum), why is it so difficult to offer a convincing argument for why the visual arts matter? As the contemporary art world evolves, recognizing diverse cultures, genres and media, art museums as the pubic faces of the art world are increasingly the flash point for culture clash. How does the field hold on to an accepted cultural history, define excellence and move the canon forward when art history is no longer one agreed upon trajectory? As our overall culture begins to recognize a tectonic shift in music (rap/hip hop artist Kendrick Lamar recognized for his work with a Pulitzer Prize), the cultural conversation about visual art remains in stasis, poised to change but not quite knowing how to do so. This panel asks for artists, art historians and curators to assert the meaning and cultural impact they see, practice, and experience in their work. Papers are welcome from artists/scholars working in any period or discipline but should be grounded in tangible, curatorial, studio and/or classroom experience and example.
Wish You Were Here: The Souvenir as Emblem of Regional Identity
Chair: Christopher J. Moore - Concordia University
Chair: Isabel Prochner - Syracuse University
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Souvenirs invoke powerful representations of regional identity, propagated when tourists purchase and experience these evocative artifacts. They commemorate and confirm encounters with unfamiliar landscapes, cultural rituals, and distinctive artistic practices—but they also have regional impact. When local citizens confront these same souvenirs from their own perspectives, they are provoked to assess whether the representations resonate with their lived experience. Further, having a narrow understanding of regional identity can prevent certain communities from feeling welcome—a contentious situation in a world with rising nationalistic tensions.
Wish You Were Here: The Souvenir as Emblem of Regional Identity
Chair: Christopher J. Moore - Concordia University
Chair: Isabel Prochner - Syracuse University
Email: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Souvenirs invoke powerful representations of regional identity, propagated when tourists purchase and experience these evocative artifacts. They commemorate and confirm encounters with unfamiliar landscapes, cultural rituals, and distinctive artistic practices—but they also have regional impact. When local citizens confront these same souvenirs from their own perspectives, they are provoked to assess whether the representations resonate with their lived experience. Further, having a narrow understanding of regional identity can prevent certain communities from feeling welcome—a contentious situation in a world with rising nationalistic tensions.
This session aims to interrogate cultural and geographic depictions masquerading as “authentic” exemplars of regional cultures. This may involve investigating from the outsider’s perspective (assumptions and expectations), as well as observing how regions choose to portray themselves to cater to visitors’ perceptions. As sociologist Zygmunt Bauman asserts, “[Tourists] pay for their freedom; the right to disregard native concerns and feelings, the right to spin their own web of meanings.”1
How can we envisage contemporary forms of souvenirs that move beyond the grand narratives of regional and national identity? Can we speculate on new forms of souvenirs and representations that challenge the typical souvenir genre?
We are particularly interested in papers that investigate representations of Canadian identity, but all topics related to regional tourist economies and souvenir culture are welcomed.
1. Zygmunt Bauman, Postmodern Ethics (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993), 241.
Women Artists in Germany, Central Europe, and Scandinavia, 1880-1960
Historians of German, Scandinavian, and Central European Art and Architecture
Chair: Kerry L. Greaves
This session seeks to address the aesthetic innovations, cultural-political context, and critical reception of progressive women artists active in Scandinavia, Germany, and Central Europe from the emergence of modernism until the feminist movement took shape in the 1960s—a period that remains ripe for new scholarly contributions. For Scandinavian artists such as Franciska Clausen and Rita Kernn-Larsen, their relationship to art movements was not straightforward and they employed a wide range of styles and practices. They and their work often transgressed neat categorizations, and they undertook complex negotiations with socio-cultural norms. The term “woman artist” itself as a homogenous category is a misnomer that obscures a range of differences; the idea of the feminine, too, is now considered fluid. Papers may address any of the following questions: How did women formulate artistic subjectivity, identity, and autonomy within art movements, especially those most closely associated with masculinity? How did their work advance or disrupt the criteria of the movements with which they were involved? What strategies did women develop in order to navigate environments that restricted their professional access? What was the critical reception of their work, how did this impact their careers, and what were the conditions surrounding their later art historical treatment?
Working Together on the Frontier: Collaborations with STEAM across campus
Chair: Barbara Westman - Slippery Rock University
In the undergraduate level, within one semester, the studio art course curriculum provides students with a set of required competencies, as well as a developed confidence in producing prints. The development of technical skills and conceptual growth does not seem to develop in a parallel manner. As a consequence, students lack confidence in their work which often leads to losing interest. Their frustration is often expressed by decisions resulting in premature closures.
Introducing an interdisciplinary collaborative project to the curriculum can provide an undiscovered source of inspiration, a diverse thinking and a new way of communicating with non-art partners. Engaging other disciplines with art results in discovery of new territories for all involved. How does this intersection impact the printmakers, other students and campus?
While art and science collaborations have been discussed and successfully applied in academia before, the intention of opening students to finding inspiration through collaboration with science can at first be seen as mission impossible. The unexpected realization of availability of ideas resulting in a collaboration is a rewarding experience. This panel seeks to examine the ways collaborative projects intersect between the arts and other disciplines, fostering intellectual growth and creativity.
Writing about Art: Women Authors and Art Critics in the Late Nineteenth-Century
Chair: Leanne M. Zalewski - Central Connecticut State University
When reading art criticism in journals and books from the late nineteenth-century, one is struck by the large number of women writers who informed and shaped public opinion on the arts. Many of these women wrote for leading publications. Some examples include Lucy Hooper’s Paris Salon reviews for the popular Art Journal, and Marie-Amélie Chartroule de Montifaud, who wrote under the nom de plume of Marc de Montifaud for the influential French journal, l’Artiste. Some women, such as Clara Erskine Clement and Clara Stranahan attempted to shape new art canons through publishing art histories. How do we interpret these criticisms and art histories today? Have they been overlooked as less important or less intelligent than their male counterparts? Does Paul Mantz’s writing carry more intellectual weight than Marc de Montifaud’s? Or is William C. Brownell’s French Art more reliable than Stranahan’s History of French Painting? This panel seeks to continue the work of Wendelin Guentner, Véronique Chagnon-Burke, and Heather Belnap Jensen in Women Art Critics in Nineteenth-Century France (2013) and extend the borders beyond France to the United States, England, and any other part of the world where women’s voices played a crucial role in interpreting art.