Call for applications
The 9th Spring-Academy organized by the International Consortium of Art History, will takeplace from the 16th to the 20th of May 2011 in Frankfurt-on-Main and focus on the theme of
the artist. The School offers the possibility for doctoral and post-doctoral students fromdiverse perspectives and specializations to share their research, their approaches and theirexperiences in a forum working alongside established scholars. Programs of the previous
Spring-Academies temps can be accessed on the site www.proartibus.net. Participation in a
Spring-Academy is a necessary prerequisite for obtaining the additional diploma in theinternational aspect of history of art. Both doctoral and post-doctoral candidates areencouraged to propose specific papers related to their subject of research in whatever period
or field of art history they are concentrating, regardless of the format they wish to choose.
Presentation of the subject
When approaching the issue of the artist in the history of art, the discipline, art history, needs
to re-examine its archaic desire to discover the intentions of the subject behind the works.
Since the very birth of the discipline, the personality of the artist has been an object of greatinterest, explained by the relationship between the creative subject – as the originating
individual and the place of creation – and the artistic interpretation. Furthermore, artistic
subjectivity and its conceptualization have played an important role in the historical processof valorizing the autonomous and supreme subject, beginning in the contemporary period. As“prototype subjects” artists have become models of modernity, as Heinz Knobeloch andNathalie Heinich have demonstrated.
This intricate web of relationships makes the renewal of interest in the figure of the artist so
fruitful. During the 1960s, several authors such as Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault andSusan Sontag, announced the “death of the author” and the end of interpretive practices whichlook for the source of meaning in the artist’s intentions. At that juncture, art history founditself obliged to give up its status as the paradigmatic science of the subject. It thus founditself in a position of studying the contingent character of historical conceptualizations of theartist, without becoming too easily attached to the idea of the creative genius. Art history had
previously favored concepts that stressed the creative potential of exceptional individuals andwas rooted in paradigms of autonomy, originality and authenticity. These paradigms wereprivileged at the expense of the opposing ideological concepts of (for example) the technician
or skilled engineer, based on an ideal model from Antiquity or the Middle Ages or –alternatively – concepts of creation through unconscious or instinctive powers. It would seemthat now is the time to reconstruct, in a more systematic fashion, the image of the artist
through its historical transformations, within the sphere of Western post-colonial culture aswell as through global notions of the authorship of visual artifacts, and to interpret them in acomparative perspective.
One of the numerous clichés, that of the medieval artist who effaced himself before his work
and, as a modest craftsman, renounced any claim to glory, is a product of reductive thinking.
Recent studies have revealed the existence of numerous artists’ traces and inscriptions. Thesesignatures, used to claim the authorship of a work or an opus, clearly refute such stereotypes.
It is equally inappropriate to envisage a homogenous image of the artist throughout the
Antiquity and the Middle Ages without having retraced the history of divergent notions ofartistic authorship in different periods, within different artistic genres and across many
regions.

Certainly, we can find early testimonies of artists revealing their self-consciousness ascreative subjects, but it is only in the Renaissance that the emphatic concept of the artist
developed. Consequently the material aspects of the work are de-emphasized and recognitionof the artistic act as creation belonging to the world of ideas is promoted. “Disegno” and“concetto” respectively, as well as “invenzione”, become the criteria of this new artistic
creativity that privileges, on the whole, a more spiritual notion of creation. The artist is thus
elevated to the status of a scientific researcher, inventor and philosopher. To the “ennobling”
aimed at by the artists themselves in their works is added the retrospective creation of legends
by means of a new literary genre: the artist’s biography. This would reach its first peak with
Vasari in the middle of the 16th century and would serve as a model for art history in its
beginnings. On the socio-historic level this process manifests itself in the fact that artists
became closer to the life and culture of the courts as some of them are actually ennobled.
Simultaneously, we observe increasing ambitions surrounding the training of artists, which
includes philological and literary erudition, knowledge of optics and physics, and evenanatomical expertise. Consequently, artistic formation becomes institutionalized in academies
which spring up everywhere in Europe.
Education plays a crucial role in the growing independence of art, with its apogee occurring
during the 19th and 20th centuries. This development is followed by changes in social statusof the artist who, as he is increasingly emancipated from close ties with his patron, becomesdifficult to classify in sociological terms, shifting as he does between the roles of prince andthat of pauper. New phenomena come to light: the “unknown artist”, the autodidact, the“outsider”. From the 19th century onwards, the artist is no longer defined by his education,
his temperament or his particular ability to create an original work and, as a consequence, thenotion of what constitutes an artist is broadened. The boundaries between artist and non-artist
similarly dissolve. All those who produce images without necessarily having the intention tocreate, such as the mentally ill, the “primitives” or even children are labeled artists.
The Spring-Academy aims to examine the extent and the diversity of the notions of the figureof the artist and the historical models in which they are inscribed. All aspects of genderstudies are explicitly included in this project.
1. The Myth of the artist
Mythical notions of the artist have many aspects, extending from the idea of the artist as
creator, saint, savior or messiah, to his classification as inventor or scientist, original oruniversal genius, and beyond as an obsessive, a madman or a priest-like shaman. An artist
may appear as a tragic character, dying because of his art or his surroundings, as a martyr or asick person. Myths of Pygmalion, Prometheus, Hephaestus, or Orpheus are part of this image
as well as anecdotes about artists from Antiquity or more modern periods. Modernity itself
invents the image of the unknown artist: we could even say, the fictive or pretend artist.
2. Notions of artistic production
There is a tension between different concepts of artistic production. On the one hand, artistic
work is seen as a translation of a conscious realization of ideas that emanate from the artist
him or herself or from other individuals – the patron or an intermediary delegated by thelatter. On the other hand is the emphasis on creative inspiration, that is, more or lessunconscious aspects of artistic production. During the Middle Ages, in the sphere of theEastern Church, artists’ work could be described as religious service. A perfect copy may be
more highly esteemed than the idea of originality. Contrasting notions of creativity havedifferent religious and cultural foundations: on the one hand the production of images isdescribed as a creative act by means of translation of the idea of divine creation. The artist
acquires the status of a being close to the divine. Conversely, in revolutionary societies, theartist could be the precursor of a new world in which everyone is an artist. Other concepts
concentrate on virtuosity as the focal point of artistic work and within Romanticism we evenfind the notion of the “artist without hands”.
3. The topoi of the inborn gift of art
According to Ernst Kris’s and Otto Kurz’s famous work on the “Legend of the artist”, wemust question the topoi developed for the description of the inborn gift of art. The natural
talent of a Giotto, the perfectly straight line, or round circle, the grapes of Zeuxis,
Rembrandt’s servant … are all periphrases describing artistic faculties. Since, from the
Romantic period onwards, the work of art has become a priceless talent, genius appears to be
an inborn gift (don-né in French), received by the artist as an act of grace from a higher
authority. Friedrich Wilhelm Schlegel conceived the artistic opus as an incomprehensible
witness of interior eschatology. Discovery, vocation, liberation of the self and other tropes
used to describe artistic initiation will be studied in this section.
4. Becoming an artist, the training
Training plays a decisive role in the life of an artist. It is possible to follow the transformationof the notion of apprenticeship over time. Apprenticeship in the workshop would
progressively be replaced by education in art academies. This evolution is accompanied by ashift in the range of skills and fields of knowledge required. One of the determining aspects ofearlier training involved the acquisition of knowledge which cannot be found in theworkshops of the master craftsmen or the academy rooms. Subsequently, an excursion or along journey, especially to Rome, often completed the training and the professionalization ofartists. Conversely, the contemporary period witnessed a surge of doubts about the role oftraining in the genesis of an artist and the notion of the artist as an autodidact was further
developed. This section aims both to raise questions relating to modes of artistic educationand their limitations, and also to the role attributed to training in the biographic historiographyof artists.
5. The artist after his death
Stories of the circumstances of the artist’s death follow rules which are different from theform of admiration enjoyed by an artist during his lifetime. This posthumous cult contrasts
greatly with the veneration of non-artists, as do particular aspects of artists’ graves. It is often
the case that the artist himself takes a great interest in his posthumous image and tries toinfluence it. The life of the artist after his death includes, among other aspects, its
instrumentalization: for example, the life of Albrecht Dürer or Caspar David Friedrich was
instrumentalized by the Nazis. Similarly, the reception and the interpretation of artists’ lives
after their deaths is evident in the production of other artists, students or followers who
succeed their master.
6. The artist in the work and the artist as work
The figure of the artist often appears as a subject in works of art – depicted by his or her own
hand or by someone else. Furthermore, his presence in the work is also revealed through thesignature and its placement. Portraits of ancient or contemporary artists enjoyed great
popularity in the 19th and the 20th centuries. Artists also appear in group portraits. Honorificor fraternal paintings allow us to establish lines of contact between artists. The self-portrait isa reflection on the self, the work and social position of the artist. We catch glimpses of artistic
work in scenes of workshops and academy rooms. During the 20th century we can see ablurring of the boundaries between the work and its author. Orlan, Gilbert and George, Eva
and Adele are living works of art, the author embodying the work.
7. Individual representation and self-stylizing
Through self-promotion, the artist grounds himself in society, describes his ambitions andtries to control societal behavior towards himself. Self-promotion presupposes different ideasof representation and stylization. Artists present themselves as princes, bohemians, outsiders,
entrepreneurs, stars, etc. They even adopt the role of anti-artist. Their own writings, such as
autobiographies, letters, journals, theoretical essays and manifestos, provide different meansof forming their image, as do printed or radio and television interviews and publicappearances.
8. The disappearance of the artist as author
The death of the author, so often evoked in the framework of cultural studies, has been taken
up or even prepared by artists. The initial approach of the Fluxus movement has been taken up
by on-line art, where the author is no longer visible: the works often come from artists who
refuse to reveal their identity. Similarly, graffiti artists prefer anonymity, although recognitionof their artistic signature means a lot to them. Conversely, collective works identify theirauthors, but without assigning particular contributions to individuals. All of these examples
have as a starting point a conscious act, a strategy of a free artist, whereas in the mechanicaland applied arts there are no artists associated with the work. Nevertheless, artifacts without
an author, such as the veil of Veronica, have become very prestigious objects, especially in
the Middle Ages.
9. Artist as a social being
The relationship between artists and the society which surrounds them is contradictory. Theirlegal position, as well as their social status, are assigned to them by society. Their ties withthe art market, essential for artists, and contact with clients and patrons provide a sort ofanchoring in society. Nevertheless, from the beginnings of the modern period, the artist isplaced outside the networks of production and of the economy. He presents himself as an
outsider – or, if he is grounded in the society it is as a revolutionary, an avant-garde andmoving it forward. The artists’ profession changes through the centuries and varies from one
society to another.
10. Transmission and mediation of the image of the artist
Artists’ lives represent the oldest form of transmission and mediation of the image of theartist. A history connects to that tradition through the development of the artists’ monograph,a format that stands at the center of scientific publication. This concept it taken up by a typeof exhibition which has become very popular: the monographic art exhibition. Art academies
have been particularly implicated in mediating the image of the artist, even before museums
took on this task. Furthermore, media such as art, literature, theater and film play their own
important role in the transmission of artists’ lives.
Procedures and proposals
Students (doctoral and post-doctoral) wishing to participate in this encounter are asked to senda (single) paper proposal of 20 minutes maximum, and a brief CV listing languages used, totheir respective national representatives (see the list at the end of this document) before 14th ofFebruary 2011. Proposals, with the candidate’s name, email address and institutional
affiliation, should not exceed 1800 characters or 300 words. They can be written in English,
French, German or Italian, and should be submitted as a Word document. If possible, the title

of the section (or sections) in which they wish to be included should be indicated. The
proposals will be gathered, examined and selected by country. National representatives will
send the list of the accepted proposals by email (EDP2011@kunst.uni-frankfurt.de) on 1st ofMarch 2011 to the organizing committee which, following consultation with the network’s
scientific committee, will establish the definitive program of the Spring-Academy. The
announcement of the selected participants will be published in the beginning of March 2011
on the websites of the network www.proartibus.net and of the INHA www.inha.fr. (NB: In thetwo weeks following the acceptance of their candidacy, participants will have to submit acorrect translation of their proposal in another official language of the network.) Since
everyone can give talks in their own language, a knowledge of other languages is required.
Participants with native romance languages need to have at least a passive knowledge ofeither English or German. Participants from Anglophone or Germanophone countries need tohave at least a passive knowledge of either French or Italian.
Proposals for those wishing to participate as respondents
Students who have participated twice or more in earlier Spring-Academies are asked to offer
their candidacy solely as respondents. Furthermore, young scholars, post-doctoral anddoctoral students whose research is well advanced can also participate in the Spring-Academy
as respondents. The duties of the respondents involve leading the discussion at the end of eachsession by proposing a re-reading of the issues brought up by the participants. The
respondents will summarize the session, ask new questions and pursue the debate along otherlines, suggested to them by their own research. All candidates wishing to take part in the
Spring-Academy as respondents are asked to send a copy of their CV and a brief statement ofinterest to their national representatives, underlining their specific qualifications for the
chosen section before 14th of February 2011.
Call for papers (professors)
As with each session, the professors from the network can either propose a paper or presideover a session. Teachers wishing to intervene in the program are asked to make their intention
known to the Organizing committee by email to this address: (EDP2011@kunst-unifrankfurt.de).
Organizing committee
Thomas Kirchner (Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt-on-Main)
Gabriele Frickenschmidt (Goethe-Universität Frankfurt-on-Main)
Ursula Grünenwald (Goethe-Universität Frankfurt-on Main)
Iris Wien (Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt-on-Main)
National representatives
Canada:Todd Porterfield (Université de Montreal)
todd.porterfield@umontreal.ca
France:Anne Lafont (INHA)
anne.lafont@inha.fr
Germany:
Thomas Kirchner (Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt-on-Main)kirchner@kunst.uni-frankfurt.deMichael Zimmermann (Katholische Universität Eichstaett)michael.zimmermann@ku-eichstaett.deItaly: Marco Collareta (Università di Pisa)
m.collareta@arte.unipi.it
Maria Grazia Messina (Università di Firenze)mariagrazia.messina@unifi.it
Japan:
Atsushi Miura (Universität von Tokio)
amm579@arion.ocn.ne.jp
Switzerland:
Jan Blanc (Université de Génève)
jan.blanc@unige.ch
United Kingdom:
Richard Thomson (Edinburgh University)
r.thomson@ed.ac.uk
United States:
Henri Zerner (Harvard University)hzerner@fas.harvard.edu