SeeingMedievalArt-Gillerman

7/31/2019 SeeingMedievalArt-Gillerman

1/4

Medieval Academy of America

Seeing Medieval Art by Herbert L. KesslerReview by: Dorothy GillermanSpeculum, Vol. 81, No. 2 (Apr., 2006), pp. 546-548Published by: Medieval Academy of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20463767 .

Accessed: 28/02/2012 00:36

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Medieval Academy of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Speculum.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=medacadhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20463767?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20463767?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=medacad


2/4

546 ReviewsCarin Ruff's study of color termsinAldhelm adds significantly o the substantial bodyof comment onAnglo-Saxon color terms,but her analysis ofAldhelm's "excessive use" of

the word purporeus would have benefited fromconsideration of George Henderson'schapter "The Colour Purple: A Late Antique Phenomenon and ItsAnglo-Saxon Reflexes"inhis book Vision and Image inEarly Christian England (1999).IElfric is one of the fewwriters inOld English with a sufficient ody of survivingmaterialfor ittobe possible to examine stylistic hange and variety, nd this is skillfully harted byHaruko Momma in relation to rhythm nd alliteration. Her conclusions concerningAlfric's"stylisticodyssey," namely, that therewas experiment,development, and thematureuse of different tylesfordifferent urposes, may well have been reflected, s she says, intheworks of other anonymous artists and writers. For poetryAndy Orchard demonstrateshow theuse of shared formulae can identify ynewulf's authorship.The lack of any writings on aesthetics, such as existed in the classical and Byzantineworlds, means that,asRoberta Frank points out inher paper, "We do not know how OldEnglish poets learned their rt,orwhat they thought good or bad," and the same appliesto thevisual arts.We can note, as Frank does, theuse or lack ofuse of certaingrammaticalforms, likewise the use of visual motifs,which could be chronological distinguishers orindeedmight be thedistinctivemark of an individualorworkshop, butwe cannot be certainof their functionormeaning.The lastword can go toNicholas Howe, who concludes his elegantly succinct contribution, "What We Talk aboutWhen We Talk about Style,"with the suggestion that styleis in some measure "the human noise" we hear in textual and visualmaterials. "That iswhy it is so veryhard to talk about style, ndwhy we keep trying o do so."

There areminor flaws in theproduction: text seems to bemissing inSchipper's articlebetween pages 157 and 159; ina book as reasonably priced as this, ne could hardly expecthigh-quality illustrations,but theseare uniformlymuddy and flat, acking invisual detail,and lackingalso ina comprehensive listing. his lack of a listof illustrationsiseven odderwhen an index ofmanuscripts cited throughout thebook isprovided.The value of thisbook is not somuch thatAnglo-Saxon styleshave been redefined ndreinterpreted s that leading scholars inAnglo-Saxon cultural studies have produced newinsights into their specialist fieldsunder the stimulus of facing common problems. Thisshould encourage otherAnglo-Saxonists todo likewise.ROSEMARYCRAMP,Durham University (Emerita)

HERBERT L. KESSLER, SeeingMedieval Art. (Rethinking theMiddle Ages, 1.) Peterborough,Ont., and Orchard Park, N.Y.: Broadview Press, 2004. Paper. Pp. 256 plus 12 colorplates; 42 black-and-white figures. 19.95.This study of medieval imagery, the firstvolume in a new series with the overall titleRethinking theMiddle Ages, surveys currentdevelopments ina field thathas seen significant expansion in thepast fifteen ears.Kessler, noting the ontributions of scholars outsideaswell aswithin the fieldof art history,casts his net fairlywide in order to do justice tosuch issues as the relationship between images and words, appropriation and reuse ofmaterials, and the functionality f objects. The author presents thebook as an update onthe state of medieval art history,by implication intended for an audience of scholars, students, and knowledgeable readers.His announced purview is theLatinWest from800 to1300, and his examples are drawn predominantly frommural painting, manuscript illumination, and sculpture,particularlyworks inmetal and ivory. esslermodestly admits toa lack of expertise inmedieval architecture; thus this survey inevitablybecomes a storyofmedieval artwithout the framework of great buildings, and the treatment fmonumental


3/4

Reviews 547sculpture is frustratingly rief.His concern, as in the earlier Spiritual Seeing: PicturingGod's Invisibility inMedieval Art, is todemonstrate thecentralityof visual experience inmedieval culture and to inciteour own visual imaginationwith regard to sacred art of thepast. The issueof seeing, therefore, sconcerned primarilywith the formationof images ofChrist in theearlyMiddle Ages and themanner inwhich, by the twelfth entury, rtcouldconvincingly transform arthlymaterials and corporeal vision into a perception of thedivine.In the first hapters, entitled "Matter," "Making," and "Spirit," Kessler leadsus throughan examination ofmodes of seeing as theywere understood bymedieval theologians fromAugustine to theVictorines. Thus the literateviewer progressed fromthematerial appearance of things to an allegorical or, inAugustine's words, a "spiritual" perception of thesignificancebeyond their utward appearance. Kessler notes thatmaterials were traditionally valued for their ost, purity, olor, and luminousness and suggests thatornament itselfenhanced visibility. n his discussion of relics and reliquaries therelationshipKessler drawsbetween thematerial and the spiritual is particularly intertwined, s he shows how thesacred space of reliquaryand chapel creates a facsimileof theheavenlykingdom, towhichthe relics give spiritual access.Chapter 2, takingup issuesof artistic uthorship, distinguishesbetween theparticipationof craftsmen nd patrons. Although his examples are overwhelmingly taken from the earlyMiddle Ages, Suger's self-describedrole in theprogram of Saint-Denis provides themostprovocative account of patron involvement in the creation of art.Kessler resists takingsides in therecentscholarlydebate on thenature and degree of Suger's intellectualparticipation in the typological program of thestained glass, but in theexamples of the frescoesinVicq and the decoration at Schwarzrheindorfhe notes theplausibility of connectingspecific theologianswith thoseworks.As compared with the freely anging arguments and diverse examples thatKessler citesin these initial sections, chapter 3, "Spirit," isamodel of clarity. rganizing his discussionmore conventionally on chronological lines,Kessler invokes theories of the image as articulated by Christian thinkers includingPaulinus ofNola, Bruno of Segni, and Suger.Hediscusses miraculous images as verifications of the Incarnation and metaphors of theChurch embodied in representationsofMary. The use of typologies isexploredwithin thelargerconstructof similitudes,grounded in thenotion of the seal and its imprint.This chapter and chapter 4, "Book," are thestrongest ectionsof thebook, informed yyears of scholarship and a bibliographic range thatwill be an inspirationand an invaluableresource forKessler's readers. Startingwith the idea of sacred books viewed as vasa sacrato be ruminated likethe ucharist itself, essler focuseson theApocalypse and giantBibles.He makes itclear how images came to acquire layeredmeanings through ssociation withdiverse textual sources and how interpretive nd exegetical textswere assimilated intoillustration of Scripture aswell as texts like theExpositio inCantica ofHonorius Augustodunensis,Bibles moralisees, or latermanuscripts intendedforprivate devotions such astheHours ofYolande de Soissons.Later chapters dealing with the church, life (and death), and performance are usefulprimarilyfor their overage of the issues and their xtensive notes. Kessler considers churchdecoration an extension of book decoration; his treatment fmonumental sculpturesuffersfromthe absence of a thoroughdiscussion of theorganizing functionof architecture andprecludes speculation on aspects of seeing such as perception of proportion and scale,repetition, adence, and pattern recognition.Aniconic or geometric schemata as theyhavebeen analyzed byMadeline Caviness are likewise absent from essler's discussion ofGod'sHouse.Medieval viewers' response to art remains difficultto assess in thisbook, and readersmay come to feel that it is not central toKessler's view of art as exegesis. In the later


4/4

548 Reviewssections on life nd performance, theauthor notes the increasingly ositive understandingof thecreatedworld thatemerged inthethirteenth entury, articularlyas patronage shiftedto the secular courts. During this timealso the image cultwas promoted by themendicantorders, and vernacular preaching transformedtheaudience for art.This "audience" consisted of new viewers whose mental and visual baggage was quite differentfromviewersof the earlierMiddle Ages. SinceMichael Baxandall's concept of a "period eye," many arthistorians have triedto analyze the intersectionof visual images and visual experience. AsDavid Freedberg and others have recognized, response toworks of art includes the possibility of diverse readings and evenmisreadings of images, and seeing itselfhas a history.

DOROTHY GILLERMAN, Cambridge, Mass.

MICHAEL KLAPER,Die Musikgeschichte der Abtei Reichenau im 10. und 11. Jahrhundert:Ein Versuch. (BeiheftezumArchiv furMusikwissenschaft, 52.) Stuttgart:Franz Steiner,2003. Pp. 323 plus 19 black-and-white figures; tables andmusical examples. ?64.The titleofMichael Klaper's book raises high expectations on the part of the reader.ImmediatelyAnselm Schubiger's classic book on themedieval music history of nearby St.Gall comes tomind (Die Sdngerschule St. Gallens vom 8. bis zum 12. Jahrhundert [Einsiedeln, 1858]), a study thatKlaper heralds as an importantexample for thewriting ofmusic history with a local focus. Although Klaper does not address the subtitle in hisintroduction, s thecurious readerwould expect, it ndeedproves programmaticwhen seenin thecontext of thewhole book. The methodology Klaper utilizes remainsrathernebulous.The reader has to reach the final chapter tograspmore information:Klaper refersto hisapproach as writingmusic history "inmargine," a problematic term,since it is not selfexplanatory and theonly clarification thatcan be found is a quotation attributed to Andreas Haug, Klaper's thesissupervisor,who contends that "isolated occurrences of chantsin books of differing ontent" are sometimes apt to add to the greater picture drawn by"complete" books (p. 224). Upon turningthe lastpage the reader can only conclude thatthe author has not simply fallen short of his goal but thathe has set forhimselfan impossible task.Klaper confirms thatonly two complete chant sources have survived that arebelieved to have been produced at the criptoriumofReichenau: Bamberg, Staatsbibliothek,MS lit.5, an extensive tropar-sequentiary, nd Zurich, Zentralbibliothek,MS Rh. 71, agradual. In each case itremainsunclear ifthework was compiled forthespecific liturgicaluse of themonastery itself r fortheneeds of a different hurch. Inaddition, musicologistshave long attributed five hant book fragments oReichenau, insome cases on ratherweakgrounds, as well as approximately twenty other books of differinggenres that includeisolated chants or chantmelodies.In light f thispaucity of chantmanuscripts the uthor's attempttobroaden thespectrumof accessiblemusical sources can only bewelcomed. However, although Klaper discusseschants and chant melodies from variety of sources heretoforenot associated with Reichenau, his arguments relymainly on two fragments, arlsruhe, Landesbibliothek, MS U. H.Fr.24, and Freiburg, Erzbischofliches Archiv, Fragm. 3. But indeed these leaves show surprisingly little orrespondence with the largersources long accepted as having Reichenauprovenance. Inmost cases the author has not convincingly established a parallel transmission within themonastery itself r at other centers. Solely on grounds of comparisons ofscriptand notation of the four-leaf arlsruhe fragment, troper-proserfromaround theyear 1000, and the double-leaf Freiburg troper fragment,from the eleventh century, nyattributionofprovenance is amere act of speculation.On thebasis of thevague possibilitythat the two fragments riginated atReichenau, or the fact thatno evidence speaks against

Documents

SeeingMedievalArt-Gillerman