fix the format of this transcript. separate the hosts. include fillers and everyting

:
All right, so have you ever pictured yourself like walking into one of those grand old art academies? You know, the kind of place with like towering marble statues and the smell of oil paints hanging in the air. It's easy to get lost in that world, right? But have you ever stopped to think about how these institutions even came to be in the first place? It's a really interesting story actually. Right, turns out it's way more interesting than you might think. It's full of like. the power struggles and the surprising twists and turns. And get this, it even connects to how we experience art and even TV today, which I thought was super interesting. So get ready to dive into Art History's History by Vernon Hyde Miner with us because things are about to get fascinating. Yeah. For example, did you know that the very first academy was actually named after a pleasure garden in ancient Greece? Really? Yeah. Let's talk about an unexpected origin story, right? It's true. Around 400 BC, The philosopher Plato established his school in Athens in a spot that was known as the Academy. And it was named after this mythical hero, Akademis. And get this, it was considered so sacred that even Spartans wouldn't attack it during wartime. Wow. Can you imagine that? That's wild. A place of learning so revered that even like armies steered clear. You'd never guess that's where the concept of an Academy originated, huh? But hold on, we're talking about a place where like- Philosophers hung out and debated big ideas, not necessarily where artists learned to, you know, sculpt or paint. So how did we get from philosophical gardens to like actual academies, you know, the kind with easels and chisels and all that? Well, for centuries after Plato's Academy, formal art instruction wasn't really a thing. The church was the main patron of the arts back then, and they mainly just used art as a teaching tool for people who couldn't read. Ah, okay. They give it like this. Stained glass windows in frescoes. They were basically like visual scripture. You know, they were meant to convey biblical stories to a population that was largely illiterate. I see. Vernon Hyde Minor actually quotes Pope Gregory the Great on this. And he says, pictures are used in churches so that those who are ignorant of letters may at least read by seeing on the walls what they cannot read in books. Oh, wow. That's a great quote. So instead of like turning pages, people were reading the art on the walls. Oh, exactly. Okay, I get it. But that makes you wonder. How did they even know how to interpret those images in the first place? Like, was that just a given? That's where workshops and guilds come in. By the Middle Ages, these organizations, they controlled artistic production and training. But their main focus was much more on practical skills than on intellectual pursuits. We even have a 14th century artist's manual, Il Libro Del Art, that was written by Sidney Notani. It's really fascinating, actually. Shinani, he goes into meticulous detail about every single step of the artistic process, grinding pigments to applying gesso. And he really emphasized the importance of mastering those hands-on techniques. So it was like a medieval how-to guide for artists, all about like honing your craft. Okay, so for centuries, it was the church guiding the themes of the art, and it was the guilds teaching the techniques. Right. Got it. But I have a feeling things started to change with the Renaissance, right? because that's when we start to get that image of the tortured artists wrestling with their muses and all that. Yeah. Well, the Renaissance definitely played a role in elevating the status of the artist, for sure. But it wasn't all angst and solitude. This is when artists began to be seen as more than just skilled craftsmen. They were recognized for their intellect and creativity. Yeah. Leonardo da Vinci is a perfect example of this. He championed this idea of the artist as both scientist and creator. somebody who would study anatomy so that they could create these lifelike paintings. Or, you know, explore new technologies to try to push the boundaries of art. So instead of just, like, being told what to paint, artists like Da Vinci were saying, hold on, we have ideas too? Okay, I like it. But how did this newfound respect for artists actually translate into, like, the establishment of academies? It all started in 16th century Florence with the founding of the Accademia del D'Azegno. And this was the world's first official art academy. Wow. And it was a game changer. Artists were no longer defined solely by their chosen medium, like being a painter versus a sculptor. Right, right. Instead, they were all united by this concept of diseno. And this is a term that encompasses design, drawing, and even intellectual creativity itself. Oh, wow. And this was huge E for raising their status. Suddenly, art wasn't just about manual skill. It was about the power of the mind. Yeah, it's like the Renaissance really gave artists a seat at the table, you know, this newfound respect for artists and their intellect. It feels like it really set the stage for how we view art and artists today. Definitely. But I have a feeling things get even more interesting though as we move into 17th century France, right? Because from what I've heard, the French Academy, they weren't afraid to like throw their weight around when it came to art. You're not wrong. This is where art and power become seriously intertwined. We're talking about Louis XIV's design king himself. He used the Academy Royale de Pantour, the sculpture, to basically control and shape French art to his liking. Oh, wow. And we're talking huge historical paintings, like glorifying his reign. Of course. There was this rigid set of rules about what subjects were even considered worthy of depicting. And like a very clear hierarchy of artistic genres. It was all about this projection of power and grandeur. It sounds like Louis IV had some strong opinions about art. You did. But this idea of like dictating what good art should look like, it feels very familiar, doesn't it? Yeah. It's like the ancestor of those best dressed lists. So you know those Instagram filters everyone uses today where everybody's trying to fit some predetermined mold of what's considered beautiful or acceptable. That's a really interesting connection. And it highlights how influential this period was in shaping how we still view beauty. Wow. And this is also when we start to see that concept of ideal beauty emerging in art. you know, those impossibly perfect bodies and those noble themes that we still recognize today. It's amazing how these ideas about beauty that were established centuries ago still resonate with us today, like even in just like how we take a selfie. I know, right. But art wasn't always so focused on portraying like this idealized version of reality, was it? Right. When did those more raw emotional themes start to emerge? That's where the French Academy's fascination with psychology comes into play. They were really obsessed with depicting emotions in a realistic way. And Vernon Hyde Minor actually argues that this was like the very, very early beginnings of acting as we know it today. Oh, wow. This focus on emotional depth and expression, it's like the Renaissance gave art a brain, and then the French Academy came along and gave it a heart. Now, that's a connection I didn't see coming. So all those dramatic movies and TV shows that I'm obsessed with. They actually owe a debt to 17th century French art. It's true. Who knew? But I'm curious, because for centuries, art seems to have revolved around the church, or like powerful patrons and these really exclusive academies. So how did everyday people get involved? Was there like an art world equivalent of storming the Mass deal? Not quite a revolution, but there was a game changer, the salon system. Starting in the 18th century, the French Academy. They began holding these massive public art exhibitions. They were called salons, and we're talking huge crowds of people with those little exhibition catalogs flying off the shelves. It's like the art event of the year. Exactly. It's like art was going viral, you know? Everybody wanted to be in the know to see and be seen at the salon. Yeah, exactly. But with all of those opinions swirling around, I imagine that this is also around the time that art critic started to emerge. Right. You got it. The salon system gave birth to the art critic. for better or for worse. Oh no, not the critics. And this is when art really starts to become this topic of public debate. It went from being somebody was hidden away in palaces and churches to something that everyone could experience and have an opinion on. And it was a huge step toward making art more accessible, even if it came with a healthy dose of critique. So true, it's like everyone's an art critic these days, but this whole wave of public art exhibitions, it couldn't have just stayed confined to those Parisian salons forever. You're absolutely right. The influence of the academy model, along with this new found public enthusiasm for art, it started to spread far beyond France's borders. And by the 19th century, we started to see art academies popping up all over the world, from America to Asia. And oftentimes they were modeled after those prestigious European institutions. It's fascinating how these academies with their roots in ancient philosophy and those medieval guilds. became these global institutions that were shaping artistic tastes and trends. And it wasn't just about the academies themselves, right? The entire concept of art education, it started to evolve right alongside them. Right. Which makes me wonder, like, when did art history, as we know it, you know, with university lectures and textbooks and all that, when did that enter the picture? Yeah. Was that like a natural progression from these art academies that were popping up, or was it a whole separate story altogether? It's a fascinating blend of both, actually. Really? While academies, they focused on actually creating art, the study of art history as a formal discipline, that took a slightly different path. And it's got its only set of surprising twists and turns. Yeah, I'm really intrigued. So how did we get from those grand salons and atelier to lecture halls filled with art history students debating brushstrokes and symbolism? Tell me more. Well, get ready for a journey that takes us from ancient ruins to d***. dusty libraries to the hallowed halls of some of the most prestigious universities in the world. Picture this. It's the late 1600s. Okay. And the French Academy is a hotbed of debate. Oh well. But we're not just talking about like which shade of blue is best, you know? Yeah. This was the era of the ancients versus moderns. Like a full blown art world battle royale. Okay. Ancients versus moderns sounds a little intense for like an art debate. what were they fighting about? It all boiled down to who had the authority to decide what good art should actually look like. Ah, okay. The ancients, they believed that the pinnacle of art had already been achieved, like way back in ancient Greece and Rome. Makes sense. And later echoed in the Renaissance. Their hero was Raphael. They were all about line and disenio. Okay. They believed that those elements, they best conveyed the artist's intellect, which to them was like, the most important thing. The moderns, on the other hand, they were all about pushing boundaries. Interesting. They thought contemporary artists were just as talented as those old masters. Oh wow. And they were capable of evolving beyond those ancient ideals. Their guy was Rubens. Okay. And their weapon of choice. Cool. They thought that color packed this immediate emotional punch that transcended all that intellectualizing. It's like the art world's version of a classic rap battle. Right. Lion versus color, tradition versus innovation. But it wasn't just about like personal taste, was it? It sounds like these were some pretty deep seated beliefs about the very nature of art and like, who got to call the shots? Exactly, this wasn't just about like brushstrokes on a canvas, it was about power dynamics. Oh, wow. Challenging authority, the evolution of artistic ideas. Right. It was about breaking free from the past to assert the value of new perspectives. So who won? Did the ancients manage to silence the moderns or did those rebellious color lovers prevail? Well, that's the thing about these grand debates. They never really end. They just kind of morph and reemerge throughout history but in different forms. Oh, that's interesting. And honestly, that's what makes studying art history so fascinating. It's an ongoing conversation full of disagreements and reinterpretations and those like aha moments that just shift your whole perspective. Like we're constantly discovering new ways to see, even when it comes to art that's been around for centuries. Exactly. But let's shift gears a bit and talk about how art education itself evolved. Okay. How do we get from those exclusive academies to, whoa, art history as a university subject? Was it a smooth transition or was there some resistance to bringing those like paint splattered easels into the hallowed halls of academia? Let's just say. It wasn't exactly a love affair from the get-go. Remember how those academies, they were so hesitant to fully embrace intellectualism early on? Well, universities weren't exactly rolling out the red carpet for artists either. It really took a shift in thinking about knowledge itself. So what changed? Was it artists who wanted more academic recognition or did universities suddenly realize that, oh, art is actually worthy of serious study? It was a perfect storm of factors. In the 19th century, universities, especially in Germany, they were really buzzing about things like archaeology and the study of antiquities. And suddenly, art, beyond just, you know, looking pretty, was seen as this valuable key to understanding the past. Like those ancient sculptures and Renaissance frescoes, they weren't just objects, right? They were like historical documents, you know, like whispering secrets about the people and cultures that created. Exactly. It was like this light bulb moment where art wasn't just for admiring. It was like a portal to history. I love that. And that's actually when the term history of art itself pops up, 1764 to be exact. And from there, things really started to pick up speed. Hold on, 1764. That means art history as a formal discipline is younger than America. It always seemed like something with, you know, like ancient roots. Who were some of the like trailblazers who helped to define this new field? Well Johann Wigelmann, he was like the OG art historian. His book. geshiktetekunstis altutums, that's history of ancient art for those who don't speak 18th century German, meticulously analyzed and categorized ancient Greek and Roman art. Then you have Carl Friedrich von Rumer, who in the 1820s, he dove deep into Italian art. Interesting. It all started with this fascination with those ancient cultures, you know, and the stories. that their art could tell us. Those classical civilizations, they've always had a way of capturing our imagination. I know, right? But when did actual universities start offering dedicated art history courses? When could students actually enroll and geek out on art history lectures? The floodgates really opened in 1833. What happened? When Franz Kugler, he became professor of the history of art at the Academy of Art in Berlin. Wow. And he wasn't just lecturing. What else was he doing? This guy was writing the textbooks too, like history of painting. in 1837 and Handbook of the History of Art not long after that. Talk about a rock star art historian. Professor Kugler, you were ahead of your time. Okay, so Germany was really like the birthplace of art history as we know it. It was. But what about those like iconic American universities? When did they jump on that art history bandwagon? America, as usual, was a bit more pragmatic at first. How so? They knew that art history was important. Okay. But they weren't exactly sure what to do with it. I see. Some focused on those classic Greek and Roman periods. Right. Others on those big Renaissance names. Of course. And then there were the brave souls who were venturing into the world of American art itself. It's like they were mapping out a whole new academic landscape. But I'm guessing, though, that back then art history wasn't exactly like the most popular major. Probably not. Probably attracted a certain type of student. You're not wrong. It was definitely seen as a little out there, something for the intellectual elite. Uh-huh. And let's be honest, those early graduates probably got asked, so what are you going to do with that art history degree? A lot. Such a classic question. It's funny how times change. Today, the art world is a multibillion dollar industry. I know, right? But even back then, those early pioneers were onto something. They understood that art has this really unique power to connect us to the past, make us think critically about the present. Definitely. and just like ignite our imaginations in a way that few other subjects can. Absolutely, and what's amazing is how much the field of art history itself has evolved just in a relatively short amount of time. I was just gonna say that it makes you wonder, like what were some of those key turning points, those pivotal moments that like shaped art history into what we know it as today? Well, one of the most significant was actually rather tragic chapter in history, the rise of Nazi Germany. That's not what I was expecting. How did a dark period like that influence something as like seemingly separate as art history? It's a story of persecution and displacement. Right. But ultimately, this incredible intellectual exchange. OK. You see, in the 1930s, many brilliant German-trained art historians, a significant number of whom were Jewish, they were forced to flee Europe. And America, fortunately, became a haven for many of them. So not only did these scholars find refuge in America, but they brought with them this wealth of knowledge that would end up transforming the entire field of art history. Yes. And it led to this fascinating clash of styles, which actually, Vernon Hyde Minor highlights in art history's history. See, American art history at the time was very focused on the what, like who painted this when where. Correct. It was all very factual, like an art historical police report. Get all the details, but skip the analysis. Exactly. But these German scholars, they were all about the why. They were influenced by thinkers like Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud. So they were asking, why did this artwork appear at this specific moment in time? What social, political, even psychological forces were at play when it was created? They weren't afraid to really analyze and dig into the context. So it was about adding depth. interpretation almost like a psychological layer to understanding like not just the art itself, but the people who created it. Yes, and they introduced things like Marxism, psychoanalysis, iconography. Iconography. Now, just for those of us who haven't taken an art history class lately, what does that even mean? It's just a fancy word for the study of symbols and images in art. Think of it like visual language. Okay. How artists throughout history have used certain objects or gestures. to convey specific meanings. Ah, so like a hidden language within the artwork itself. Exactly. I love that. But I imagine that this new approach to art history, though, wasn't exactly universally welcomed. You're right. Right. You're right. Those poor American professors who were so set in their just-the-facts ways, they must have been in for a wild ride. Oh, there were definitely some raised eyebrows, some heated debates. I bet. It was this clash between objectivity versus analysis, facts versus interpretation. But like any good intellectual sparring match, both sides learned from each other. It's like that old saying, iron sharpens iron. Exactly. American art history, it gained a lot more depth. And those German scholars, they adapted too. But we're talking about a time when technology was also rapidly changing. Photography was becoming a lot more common. The slide projector was invented. Did that have any impact on how? art history was taught. Are you kidding? It was monumental. Just imagine, before that, if you wanted to show students a work of art, you had to like lug around this bulky canvas or this fragile sculpture. Or just rely on these kind of often really inaccurate engravings. It's like the difference between listening to a travel podcast and actually like going to those places. Exactly. Photography and slide projectors, they brought the world of art into the classroom. pair works side by side from different continents, different time periods. Visual analysis just like exploded. Talk about a visual feast for art history students. What a game changer. But art history wasn't going to stand still, was it? Of course not. As the 20th century unfolded, we saw the rise of things like postmodernism, critical theory, just whole new ways of thinking about and interpreting art. Now those sound like topics for a deep dive all their own. Oh yeah. I'm already adding those to the list. Before we get ahead of ourselves, let's take a moment to appreciate just how far art history has come. From those early days of like deciphering hieroglyphics to analyzing contemporary art through like a modern lens. It's incredible. It really is remarkable. And to think like so much of it traces back to those academies, to this desire to not just like create art, but to actually understand its power and its place in the world, which makes me think. What will the legacy of art academies be in the future? Will they continue to adapt and thrive in our increasingly digital age? Or will they kind of become relics of a bygone era? It's a really interesting question. And to answer that, I think we need to look at how art itself is changing. Okay, I'm all ears. So with art itself changing so rapidly in our digital age, Where does that leave art academies? Are they managing to keep up, or are they in danger of becoming museum pieces themselves? It's a question a lot of people are asking. And actually, Vernon Hyde Minor even touches on it towards the end of art history's history. Oh, OK. And on the one hand, those foundational skills, drawing composition, understanding color, those are timeless. No matter how much technology changes the art world, those fundamentals will always be relevant. Right, like you can't build a skyscraper without understanding the basics of architecture no matter how fancy your computer software is. Exactly. But it's also true that the way art is created, shared, even just experienced, is radically different today. We have digital art, virtual reality installations. We even have AI that's generating images. It's true. And that's forcing articatteries to adapt and really kind of reexamine their role. So what are some of the ways that they're adapting? Yeah, what are they doing? Are we gonna see like virtual sculpture classes or coding for creatives on the curriculum now? Some academies are already incorporating those things. Oh, wow. You know, they're offering courses on digital media, virtual reality art, even the ethics of artificial intelligence in art. Wow, that's interesting. And it's not just about the technology itself. Right. It's about how to think critically about art in this rapidly changing landscape. So it's like, instead of just teaching how to use the tools, they're teaching how to navigate this whole new world of artmaking. Yeah. That's fascinating. But it also kind of raises this question for me, with everyone in their phone now, a potential artist, does that diminish the value of an art education or the authority of those more traditional institutions? That's the million dollar question. Right. And honestly, there's no easy answer. On the one hand, the democratization of art making is great. I mean, more voices can be heard, more perspectives shared. Yeah, it's like the art world's version of social media. Everyone has a platform. In a way, yes. But there's also something to be said for the depth and the rigor of a more traditional art education. It teaches you not just how to create, but how to see, how to analyze, how to contextualize. It gives you this framework for understanding this vast history of art that came before you and then ultimately understanding your place within it. So it's like anyone can learn to mix paint, but an art education teaches you what colors to use, why those colors matter, and how those choices sort of fit into the grand conversation of art history. Exactly. Yeah. And that's a conversation that thanks to those art academies and all those passionate art historians we've been talking about, right, will hopefully continue to evolve and become even richer and more inclusive in the years to come. It's been quite a journey, hasn't it? It has. From those ancient pleasure gardens of philosophical debate. Ancient crease. To the rise of academies, the evolution of art history as like a thing. Right. To now standing on the brink of this new digital frontier, it makes you realize that art, it's so much more than just. pretty pictures. It's a reflection of who we are, where we've been, and where we might be going. It really is. I think that's a perfect note to end on. And on that note, a huge thank you to you for taking us on this incredible deep dive into the history of art academies and beyond. That's been my pleasure. I have a feeling I'll be looking at those marble statues and Renaissance paintings a little differently next time I'm at a museum. Me too. And for those of you listening, remember, whether you're an art aficionado or just starting to explore the art world... There's always more to discover, more to question, and more to learn. So keep those creative sparks flying, and we'll see you next time on the Deep Dive.