/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.18292060]

what are the best art history books?

[Anonymous No.18292071]

>>18292060
The Decline of the West

[Anonymous No.18292081]

>>18292060
Taschen artbooks.

[Anonymous No.18292128]

>>18292081
what about Phaidon?

[Anonymous No.18292150]

>>18292071
Unironically this.

[Anonymous No.18292423]

>>18292128
Phaidon is pseuds, but I own many.

[Anonymous No.18292444]

>>18292060
the story of art eh gombrich
the shock of teh new robert hughes

[Anonymous No.18292503]

>>18292060
Yea the Mona Lisa is cool and all, but where are the titties?
Just go into a half price books, they have tons of used art history books for cheap, and find one in color and one that interests you. Its what I did

[Anonymous No.18292514]

>>18292503
Falero lacks artistic originality and is like a predecessor to contemporary fantasy paintings.

Doesn't mean he can't be a professional painter, he is from the 19th century after all, but you should give too much thought to him. Go to the greats, not the mediocrities.

[Anonymous No.18292523]

I like Robert Hughes.

[Anonymous No.18292528]

>>18292514
w-who are the greats of erotic paintings.
asking for a friend haha

[Anonymous No.18293937]

>>18292503
>Just go into a half price books, they have tons of used art history books for cheap
this, or any store like that. get these large, expensive books for a fraction of what they originally sold for

[Anonymous No.18293943]

>>18292060

[Anonymous No.18293953]

>>18293943
This is a fucking terrible book written by some twitter faggot who knows nothing about art history. Just no.

[Anonymous No.18293954]

>>18293943
cringe

[Anonymous No.18293980]

>>18292060

[Anonymous No.18293986]

>>18293953
>>18293954
seething indoctrinated pomos

[Anonymous No.18293989]

>>18293986
coping twitter pseud

[Anonymous No.18294044]

>>18293986
No, anon. The author is simply not knowledgeable about the subject matter. The book is less (read not at all) art history and more "twitter traditionalist" polemic against art personally deemed distasteful.

[Anonymous No.18294045]

>>18292528
Rubens.

They do talk of 'Rubenesque' women after all.

[Anonymous No.18294056]

>>18292060

[Anonymous No.18294219]

>>18294044
>personally
objectively
literally no good fine art since the 19th century

[Anonymous No.18294333]

>>18294219
>no good art since the 19th century
Not looking hard enough because in reality you don't actually care about art.

[Anonymous No.18294341]

>>18294333
Fine
The amount of good fine art has been in free fall ever since the 19th century
>you don't actually care about art.
Depends on what you consider art eh

[Anonymous No.18294349]

>>18294219
>objectively
The author doesn't know anything about art so how could he possibly know what good art is?

[Anonymous No.18294356]

>>18294349
The author knows more than enough about art, you just don't like his conclusions
What do you consider good art then?

[Anonymous No.18294382]

>>18294356
You're defining "knowledge" very loosely then. I have, and others should have, however, higher standards.
>What do you consider good art then?
I have the ability to appreciate almost all kinds of art, not just those deemed acceptable by the twitter traditionalist rubric.

[Anonymous No.18294394]

>>18294382
>You're defining "knowledge" very loosely then. I have, and others should have, however, higher standards.
I have the ability to appreciate almost all kinds of knowledge, not just those deemed acceptable by the pomo academic rubric.

[Anonymous No.18294400]

>>18292060
Just read Ruskin (pbuh).

[Anonymous No.18294405]

>>18294394
My knowledge is informed by the great art scholars and historians who have existed across the ages, not just those who have appeared ex nihilo on twitter.com

[Anonymous No.18294417]

>>18294405
And those great art scholars and historians that lived before the 20th century, do you think they would agree more with Heard's take that art builds upon tradition and takes actual skill, or with the pomos that shitting on a table and presenting it is art?

[Anonymous No.18294434]

>>18294056
this is good if you’re noob (like me)

[Anonymous No.18294442]

>>18294417
meds desu

[Anonymous No.18294479]

>>18294417
See, if you actually knew anything about art history you'd understand that there was never this utopian state of affairs in which art's object was universally agreed upon ("le epic capital T tradition"). Art and its criticism--much like philosophy--has always took the form of a discourse, involving disagreement and disjuncture, naturally. Its modern forms are a direct continuation of this discourse. That is, the torch of this broken and fragmented tradition--but a tradition nonetheless--is being carried by your dispised "pomo" critics, and not retards from twitter.com.

[Anonymous No.18294520]

>>18294479
despised*

[Anonymous No.18294521]

>>18294479
Notice how you carefully avoided answering my question. Yes, it has always been a discourse, but my point was that before the 20th century, none of the great art scholars would have considered pomo art and would mostly have sided with Heard's take, for obvious reasons.
>("le epic capital T tradition")
Please go back to redddit
>modern forms are a direct continuation of this discourse. That is, the torch of this broken and fragmented tradition--but a tradition nonetheless--is being carried by your dispised "pomo" critics, and not retards from twitter.com.
No, Heard makes an excellent case for how this tradition was broken by pomo.

[Anonymous No.18294707]

>>18294521
>none of the great art scholars would have considered pomo art
Here's that aforementioned lack of knowledge rearing its ugly, empty head once again. Once again, again: even a cursory knowledge of art history reveals that disagreements of this very kind not only characterize art history but in fact constitute it. Heard's reading is just another in a very very long chain of readings; the difference being that his is not championed by the torchbearers.

[Anonymous No.18294761]

>>18292528
Not Rubens' fat slob bitches. Try Bouguereau.

[Anonymous No.18294781]

>>18292060
Most college intro courses use Gardner's Art through the Ages. It's a good Eurocentric overview and hopefully newer editions aren't too pozzed.

[Anonymous No.18294806]

>>18293943
This isn't a serious work. It's like recommending Horia Belcea in a philosophy thread.

[Anonymous No.18294845]

[Anonymous No.18295344]

>>18292060

[Anonymous No.18295469]

>>18292503
pretty sure there is mona lisa portraits with her boobas out

[Anonymous No.18296575]

>>18295469
based Leo