MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2552367010 · doi:10.1353/vcr.2016.0017

Transformative Beauty: Art Museums in Industrial Britain by Amy Woodson-Boulton

2016· article· en· W2552367010 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Patricia Zakreski

Notice bibliographique

RevueVictorian review · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBeautyTransformative learningAestheticsPower (physics)SociologyValue (mathematics)ArtVisual artsArt history

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Transformative Beauty: Art Museums in Industrial Britain by Amy Woodson-Boulton Patricia Zakreski (bio) Transformative Beauty: Art Museums in Industrial Britain by Amy Woodson-Boulton; pp. 270. Stanford: Stanford UP, 2012. $55.00 cloth. In Transformative Beauty: Art Museums in Industrial Britain, Amy Woodson-Boulton describes the nineteenth-century understanding of “art as experience” as a driving force behind the creation of art museums in some of the most important industrial cities of the nineteenth century—Birmingham, Liverpool, and Manchester. Tracing the efforts of a number of well-minded, Ruskin-inspired politicians, philanthropists, reformers, and art professionals, Woodson-Boulton describes the origins and development of these institutions, their collecting policies, and their interactions with their communities as separate but concerted efforts to put into practice Ruskin’s ideas about the power of art to transform society. She describes “art as experience” as a decidedly Victorian viewing experience in which museums encouraged viewers to look “through” art rather than “at” it, emphasizing what art expressed about beauty and truth and the story it told rather than focussing on formal properties such as colour, light, and composition, or on viewing art for its own sake (149). Woodson-Boulton’s concept of “art as experience” is a useful way of contextualizing the importance that many Victorian artists and critics placed on art’s moral potential, and she adds a material and civic perspective to this aesthetic debate. She notes, “Nineteenth-century municipal governments justified expenditure on art museums through the conceptual ‘use-value’ of art—its efficacy in social reform,” which was seen to come out of its ability to “communicate the wonder of nature and God’s work to a wider audience” (178). It was for these reasons, she argues, that these regional museums favoured the work of contemporary artists over that of old masters, encouraging viewers to view art objects as being “like clear windows” that offered them a view of their society that encoded greater truths and beauty and counteracted the moral and physical ugliness of the industrial cities that surrounded them (108). The value of art for these regional institutions was its potential to “effect social healing, promote moral and cultural regeneration, and train workers to become alive to beauty in the world and in design” (20). [End Page 183] Chapter 1 traces the influence of Ruskin and his ideas about art’s social and moral potential on the origins of these institutions and the men who conceived them. The reformers in each of these cities identified open public access to art as a necessary part of larger programs of municipal reform and civic improvement, such as slum clearance and street widening. But, as this chapter makes clear, the stories of these institutions were not that straightforward. In this chapter and throughout much of the study as a whole, Woodson-Boulton treats each institution separately, dedicating sections in most of the chapters to individual institutions: the Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery, the Walker Art Gallery in Liverpool, and the Manchester City Art Gallery. Though this approach at other times introduces some repetition in the content and style of the book, it works particularly well in this chapter to show the complexities that arise when individuals attempt to put theory into practice. Woodson-Boulton shows that, though grounded in Ruskin’s moral philosophy of art, each museum-building project was riven by contradictions because of its need to be financially supported by the very systems of industrial production that Ruskin argued against, while sometimes being forced by economic pressures to exclude the section of the population—the working classes—for which in the ideal they were created. Chapter 2 continues to explore each institution’s individual negotiation with a wider national debate through an examination of the debate over Sunday opening hours. If museums were ever to accomplish their stated aim to improve workers’ lives, it was argued, they needed to be open at a time that workers could attend. Though the outcome of the debate was different in each city, Woodson-Boulton identifies some of the common arguments that characterized these discussions, including identifying the spiritual nature of art as a conduit of truth and beauty...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,598
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,996

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,093
Tête enseignante GPT0,242
Écart entre enseignants0,149 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueVictorian reviewMême sujetCultural Heritage Management and PreservationTravaux en français237 207