Failed Canons: Ferdinand Avenarius and Katharine Schäffner

In the early twentieth century, critics writing about European modern art vied to categorize increasingly diverse artistic positions, name emerging artists, and define future directions. One such critic was Ferdinand Avenarius, who promoted Katharine Schäffner as the first artist to probe the possib...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Tahiti (Helsinki) 2024-12, Vol.14 (2–3)
1. Verfasser: Boddy, Jane
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue 2–3
container_start_page
container_title Tahiti (Helsinki)
container_volume 14
creator Boddy, Jane
description In the early twentieth century, critics writing about European modern art vied to categorize increasingly diverse artistic positions, name emerging artists, and define future directions. One such critic was Ferdinand Avenarius, who promoted Katharine Schäffner as the first artist to probe the possibilities of non-imitative art. Yet, despite his efforts, Schäffner finds herself conspicuously absent from the broader art-historical narratives today. This paper aims to explore the reasons behind this comparative neglect by examining a power struggle between Avenarius and Julius Meier-Graefe, influential critics who harbored conflicting visions of modern art.
doi_str_mv 10.23995/tht.152083
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>crossref</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_23995_tht_152083</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>10_23995_tht_152083</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-crossref_primary_10_23995_tht_1520833</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpjYBA2NNAzMra0NNUvySjRMzQ1MrAwZmLgNDIyMdI1MDMzZUFiczDwFhdnGRgYGJlbmBhamHIy8LolZuakpig4J-bl5xXzMLCmJeYUp_JCaW4GbTfXEGcP3eSi_OLiotS0-IKizNzEosp4Q4N4sKXxQEvjIZYak6YaAAcOMSE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Failed Canons: Ferdinand Avenarius and Katharine Schäffner</title><source>EZB Free E-Journals</source><source>Directory of Open Access Journals</source><creator>Boddy, Jane</creator><creatorcontrib>Boddy, Jane</creatorcontrib><description>In the early twentieth century, critics writing about European modern art vied to categorize increasingly diverse artistic positions, name emerging artists, and define future directions. One such critic was Ferdinand Avenarius, who promoted Katharine Schäffner as the first artist to probe the possibilities of non-imitative art. Yet, despite his efforts, Schäffner finds herself conspicuously absent from the broader art-historical narratives today. This paper aims to explore the reasons behind this comparative neglect by examining a power struggle between Avenarius and Julius Meier-Graefe, influential critics who harbored conflicting visions of modern art.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2242-0665</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2242-0665</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.23995/tht.152083</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Tahiti (Helsinki), 2024-12, Vol.14 (2–3)</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0009-0009-0542-9520</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,860,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Boddy, Jane</creatorcontrib><title>Failed Canons: Ferdinand Avenarius and Katharine Schäffner</title><title>Tahiti (Helsinki)</title><description>In the early twentieth century, critics writing about European modern art vied to categorize increasingly diverse artistic positions, name emerging artists, and define future directions. One such critic was Ferdinand Avenarius, who promoted Katharine Schäffner as the first artist to probe the possibilities of non-imitative art. Yet, despite his efforts, Schäffner finds herself conspicuously absent from the broader art-historical narratives today. This paper aims to explore the reasons behind this comparative neglect by examining a power struggle between Avenarius and Julius Meier-Graefe, influential critics who harbored conflicting visions of modern art.</description><issn>2242-0665</issn><issn>2242-0665</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpjYBA2NNAzMra0NNUvySjRMzQ1MrAwZmLgNDIyMdI1MDMzZUFiczDwFhdnGRgYGJlbmBhamHIy8LolZuakpig4J-bl5xXzMLCmJeYUp_JCaW4GbTfXEGcP3eSi_OLiotS0-IKizNzEosp4Q4N4sKXxQEvjIZYak6YaAAcOMSE</recordid><startdate>20241217</startdate><enddate>20241217</enddate><creator>Boddy, Jane</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0542-9520</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20241217</creationdate><title>Failed Canons</title><author>Boddy, Jane</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-crossref_primary_10_23995_tht_1520833</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Boddy, Jane</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Tahiti (Helsinki)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Boddy, Jane</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Failed Canons: Ferdinand Avenarius and Katharine Schäffner</atitle><jtitle>Tahiti (Helsinki)</jtitle><date>2024-12-17</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>2–3</issue><issn>2242-0665</issn><eissn>2242-0665</eissn><abstract>In the early twentieth century, critics writing about European modern art vied to categorize increasingly diverse artistic positions, name emerging artists, and define future directions. One such critic was Ferdinand Avenarius, who promoted Katharine Schäffner as the first artist to probe the possibilities of non-imitative art. Yet, despite his efforts, Schäffner finds herself conspicuously absent from the broader art-historical narratives today. This paper aims to explore the reasons behind this comparative neglect by examining a power struggle between Avenarius and Julius Meier-Graefe, influential critics who harbored conflicting visions of modern art.</abstract><doi>10.23995/tht.152083</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0009-0542-9520</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2242-0665
ispartof Tahiti (Helsinki), 2024-12, Vol.14 (2–3)
issn 2242-0665
2242-0665
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_23995_tht_152083
source EZB Free E-Journals; Directory of Open Access Journals
title Failed Canons: Ferdinand Avenarius and Katharine Schäffner
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-04T16%3A56%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-crossref&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Failed%20Canons:%20Ferdinand%20Avenarius%20and%20Katharine%20Sch%C3%A4ffner&rft.jtitle=Tahiti%20(Helsinki)&rft.au=Boddy,%20Jane&rft.date=2024-12-17&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=2%E2%80%933&rft.issn=2242-0665&rft.eissn=2242-0665&rft_id=info:doi/10.23995/tht.152083&rft_dat=%3Ccrossref%3E10_23995_tht_152083%3C/crossref%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true