Talk:Josef Strzygowski

Needs work

Certain points should simply be added to fill in the background: the controversy with Riegl & Wickhoff, and the professorship in Vienna, for example. In addition the link to UVA is broken. These can be easily fixed, and I will do so soon, time permitting.

I open a talk page, not to raise these quibbles, but to question some of the existing statements.

1) "Orient oder Rom (Orient or Rome) argued that Medieval European architecture drew heavily from Middle Eastern traditions"

I recall that the book is focused as much on visual arts as on architecture, if not more so. But it has been some time since I have consulted it, and I could be wrong.

2) "Strzygowski's work on the architecture of Armenia has been particularly influential."

Influential? Rather more controversial, to the point of eccentricity, I should think. Again, I am relying on distant memories, but I thought that Maranci's book argued that Strz. had effectively marginalized the study of Armenian architecture for nearly a century.

3) "The quality of Strzygowski's scholarship has been widely criticized, but even more controversial were the racial and political overtones of his work. He was unabashedly anti-semitic, and his work foreshadowed the ideas later espoused by Nazism."

No problem with the first sentence, nor with the assertion of Strz.'s anti-semitism (although he was also, ironically, one of the first art historians to consider "Jewish art" as a valid field; remarks on this in Stephen Fine's new book.) But to say that "his work foreshadowed the ideas later espoused by Nazism" is so vague as to be meaningless. Foreshadowed how? And which "ideas"? What was Strz.'s actual relationship to the Nazi party? (After all, he died in 1941, so was around for long enough to be directly involved.) I don't know the answers, but the statement strikes me as problematic.

Will await remarks before proceeding. Best, --Javits2000 22:06, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

My feeling is that the phrase "racist ideology" is completely over the top and without foundation! And, of course, it literally is without foundation since no source for the claim is give. BTW, it is not Stryzgowski who marginalised study of Armenian architecture. Turkey, Communism, and 1.5 million dead Armenians did it. That and prejudices amongst academics against anything that is not centered on Greece and Rome (and the ready use of their stereotype of Strzygowski to justify their prejudices). Meowy 01:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Second point first: the view that Str. (or rather his theories) marginalized the study of Armenian architecture is well founded; On this see C. Maranci, Medieval Armenian architecture: constructions of race and nation (Louvain, 2001).

First point second: Str.'s entire interpretive system is based on the concept of an innate connection btw. race & style; and he furthermore developed a grand narrative, based in related pan-German movement in contemporary Austria, which exalted the "northern" races at the expense of the "southern." Other racial polarities, e.g. Aryan/Semite are also incorporated, however incoherently, into his work, and again with a built-in assumption of superiority (Aryan [=usually Iran and Armenia] superior to Semite). Now, if these propositions are accepted, please look up racism and ideology & tell me it doesn't fit. --Javits2000 15:46, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I will re-read Maranci. However, my memory is that she essentially says what I have said. The methodology of Strzygowski, often faulty as it was, was common to many scholars in that period and it is not correct to single him out for criticism on those grounds alone, not is it correct to call such methodology "racist". The racism was actually displayed by Strzygowski's peers with their built-in assumptions that anything not connected to the cultures of Classical Greece or Rome was not worthy of study. Strzygowski's works were fundamental in breaking the uniformity of that attitude, though the attitude is still widespread in academia to this day (which partly accounts for the continuing demonisation of Strzygowski). Lacking in the entry is any mention of Strzygowski's massive contribution to the study of wooden architecture which was almost entirely ignored until he started to write about it. Meowy 01:22, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree that Strz.'s influence was crucial in opening up academia to "non-western" art history; & there is indeed an acknowledgment of this contribution under the legacy section. I'm not familiar with his work on wooden architecture, but of course a discussion of this in the article would be welcome (esp. with citations). I still maintain, however, that his work was thoroughly (and in fact unusually) racist, even for his time; I ground this assertion in the fact that his entire methodology was based on the concept, not only of race, but of the superiority of certain races to others; and on his own activity in the public sphere on behalf of pan-German causes. Both set him off from many contemporary scholars in Germany & Austria, including those (such as Riegl, Herzfeld, Sarre, van Berchem) who did take an interest in "non-western" art (and have hardly been "demonized"). There were plenty of explanatory models for the evolution of style which were available which neither relied on race nor privileged the classical (Riegl's Kunstwollen is the most obvious example), and plenty of scholars, esp. in Austria, who did not subscribe to pan-Germanism. If Strz. is today unusable as an authority, it's because his ideology permeates his work; his contribution in terms of expanding the boundaries of art history was largely exercised through his disciples (e.g. Gertrude Bell) & students (Demus, Diez, etc.). This isn't demonization, it's simply recognition that race does not constitute a valid category for the analysis of style. --Javits2000 16:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

UTC writes: "My feeling is that the phrase "racist ideology" is completely over the top and without foundation!" That is absolutely right. Strzygowski's work on Armenia etc is fundamental. Actuallly I have some of them here and have read them again and again, and can't think of anybody else, that give you that overview of church architecture. Jan Eskildsen 87.57.199.146 (talk) 21:42, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Yes Sir, you should read Maranci again. Actually she argues against some of Strzygowski's work, but also say, that his work should not just be abandoned as a whole, - some of the problems he brought up, is still not solved. And even today one can't mention problems, that he didn't deal with. (Read this: Maranci, Christina: Medieval Armenian Architecture. Construction of Race and Nation. Hebrew University Armenian Studies. Peeters Belgium. 2001.) ~~Jan Eskildsen

I have fact tagged the "racist ideology" claim. If it is to remain it needs to be made clear who is claiming it. If that cannot be made clear it suggests it is just one person and I think it then needs to be removed as a fringe opinion. I have also removed a claim that has been citation required tagged for 5 years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.64.188.4 (talk) 02:50, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

"...was a German art historian..."

I wonder what they mean by "German". He was Silesian, was Polish, was Austrian; his language was German: was it this?? Georg Salta (talk) 20:10, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Josef Strzygowski/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article is not worthy to keep. To say, that he is most famous for a racist theory is an obnoxious lie. After years of studying Wikipedia I would say: drop the whole thing - you don't have the brains to manage it. Jan Eskildsen87.57.199.146 (talk) 21:45, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Last edited at 21:45, 24 January 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 20:30, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Photographic holdings at Courtauld?

I removed the following statement (added) as I'm unable to find a record of any attribution to Strzygowski for photographic work at the Conway, Courtauld: not in the webpage cited, nor using the search facility of the library's website, nor via a generic internet search. I also checked the Wayback Machine for the webpage as it appeared close to the date of access in the cite, but his name does not appear there, either.

Photographs attributed to Strzygowski are held in the Conway Library at The Courtauld Institute of Art, London whose archive, of primarily architectural images is in the process of being digitised under the wider Courtauld Connects project.

Of course if a source is found, it should go back in, but atm, it seems to be a mystery. AukusRuckus (talk) 09:12, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

References