Earlier this week, my twitter feed—heavily populated by British academics that for some reason seem to use the format more than our American counterparts—exploded around the announcement that, from 2018 on, art history would longer be offered as subject for A-Levels in the United Kingdom. A qualifying exam often required for entrance to University, the closest equivalent we have in the United States would be … Continue reading #WhyArtHistoryMatters
I am thrilled to announce the inclusion of my article, “Materializing Modernism in Postwar Italy: Fausto Melotti, Gio Ponti, and the 1961 Esposizione Internazionale del Lavoro,” in the September 2016 special issue of Art History. The issue, edited by Natalie Adamson and Steven Harris, examines the role of materials and materiality in European art between 1946 and 1972, and includes fantastic essays on CoBrA, Soulages, British design, Spoerri, … Continue reading Publication News: Art History
I am thrilled to be giving a lecture at Middlebury College on Wednesday, February 25, 2015. The talk will begin at 4.30pm. “Materializing a Modern Italy: Gio Ponti, Internationalism, and the 1961 Esposizione Internazionale del Lavoro” Lecture by Dr. Marin R. Sullivan, Keene State College. The Esposizione Internazionale del Lavoro (International Labor Exhibition)[EIL] was a main component of Italia ’61, the international exhibition celebrating the centenary … Continue reading Middlebury College Lecture – February 25th
In the wake of the de-installation of Indifferent Matter: From Object to Sculpture at the Henry Moore Institute in Leeds (25 July – 20 October 2013), two friends and art historians decided to co-write a blog based on our own conversations about the exhibition and on a casual interrogation of one of the show’s curators, Pavel Pyś (and the mineralogist consultant for the show, Mike Rumsey), over Japanese noodles. The exhibition made waves and rustled feathers, particularly evident through a public programme that included talks by Peter Osborne and Richard Checketts, often calling into account its curatorial motivations.
The controversy sprung mainly from the decision to showcase a number of objects that are clearly – and in some cases famously – designated as artworks alongside artefacts and things not commonly placed within a fine art context such as ‘Neolithic jades, a new mineral named during the course of the exhibition, fragments of Roman sculpture and a collection of eoliths.’ All of the objects included in the exhibition, were presented on as equal formal terms as possible, with only the most basic information on small wall labels. As a result, all of the sculptural things on view were equally decontextualized, extricated from their historical or art historical specificity. The intention of the exhibition was to question at what point (or perhaps points) does an object, become not just thing but also a work of art, and once labelled as such, in this case a sculpture, how does it ‘sit’ in time. The elephant in the exhibition space, so to speak, was the fact that the art objects, when paired with natural or ‘artefactual’ objects, were robbed of some art historical authority – a result which proved offensive to some, intriguing to others, and was perhaps totally lost to those with limited specialist knowledge. Continue reading “An Indifferent Matter?”