De l'exemple a l'archive: La constitution des dicours sur l'art du passe, en France, entre 1850 et 1900

Abstract

Cette etude comprend deux volets. Le premier volet explore le champ discursif de l'histoire de l'art dans la seconde moitie du dix-neuvieme siecle en France a partir de trois modeles sociologiques principaux: le modele du "cluster" de T. N. Clark, celui de la "formation culturelle" de R. Williams et celui du "champ disciplinaire" de P. Bourdieu. Le but de l'exercice consiste a trouver les formations hegemoniques qui articulent le champ historiographique de l'art. Nous avons trouve six sous-champs qui se repartissent selon quatre types de preoccupations differentes: la chronologie qui instituent les archeologies antiques et medievales; les techniques de fabrication et les modes de construction: architecture et "arts appliques"; l'esthetique et l'importance du style: les "arts du dessin" et enfin, une approche symbolique: l'archeologie et l'art chretiens. Chacun d'eux developpe ses formations culturelles et ses--"clusters"--qui permettent la proliferation d'une multitude de textes constituant le discours usuel, donc "moyen" de la discipline.

Le second volet limite son investigation aux pratiques discursives dominantes du champ des "arts du dessin"--surtout la "vie d'artiste" et la "description d'oeuvre" en s'inspirant, pour la biographie, des travaux de D. Madelenat et de Kurz et Kris. Pour les descriptions d'"oeuvres d'art", l'analyse a ete effectuee a partir d'un certain nombre de modeles: les diverses "lexies" de R. Barthes, "la lecture comme construction" de T. Todorov, mais surtout en relevant l'importance de la theorie esthetique classique de l'ut pictura poesis et des techniques de l'ancienne rhetorique. Parmi les cas a l'etude, il faut mentionner celui de Charles Blanc dont deux oeuvres, Histoire des peintres de toutes les ecoles et Grammaire des arts du dessin, servent d'exemples pour notre propos.

Ce second volet nous permet de voir comment au XIXe siecle, la modernite en histoire de l'art N'est pas seulement a lire dans la transformation du champ artistique des avant-gardes, mais aussi dans la structuration d'un champ historiographique ou les pratiques epidictiques academiques cedent lentement, mais progressivement la place a des pratiques discursives plus strictement historiennes.

Abstract (AI English translation)

Information popover about translation disclaimer

This study comprises two parts. The first part explores the discursive field of the history of art in the second half of the nineteenth century in France from three main sociological models: the model of the "cluster" of T. N. Clark, that of the "cultural formation " by R. Williams and that of the "disciplinary field" by P. Bourdieu. The purpose of the exercise is to find the hegemonic formations that articulate the historiographical field of art. We have found six sub-fields which are divided according to four different types of concerns: the chronology which establishes ancient and medieval archaeologies; manufacturing techniques and construction methods: architecture and "applied arts"; aesthetics and the importance of style: the "arts of design" and finally, a symbolic approach: archeology and Christian art. Each of them develops its cultural formations and its--"clusters"--which allow the proliferation of a multitude of texts constituting the usual discourse, therefore "means" of the discipline.

The second part limits its investigation to the dominant discursive practices of the field of "drawing arts"--especially the "artist's life" and the "description of work" by drawing inspiration, for the biography, from the works of D. Madelenat and Kurz and Kris. For the descriptions of "works of art", the analysis was carried out on the basis of a certain number of models: the various "lexies" of R. Barthes, "reading as construction" of T. Todorov, but above all by highlighting the importance of the classical aesthetic theory of ut pictura poesis and the techniques of ancient rhetoric. Among the cases under study, mention should be made of that of Charles Blanc, two works of which, History of painters from all schools and Grammar of the arts of drawing, serve as examples for our purposes.

This second part allows us to see how in the 19th century, modernity in the history of art is not only to be read in the transformation of the artistic field of the avant-gardes, but also in the structuring of a historiographical field where the academic epideicic practices are slowly but gradually giving way to more strictly historical discursive practices.