Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:34:59.321Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Erwin Panofsky and the Renascence of the Renaissance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Carl Landauer
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It has long been understood that historians, literary critics, and art historians who write about past cultures use those cultures for present purposes, whether by turning Periclean Athens into an ideal for present-day America or the fall of the Roman empire into an ominous signal for modern empires. German humanists who sought refuge from Nazi Germany had, however, special reasons to use their cultural studies as a strategy of escape. Erich Auerbach in exile in Istanbul and Ernst Robert Curtius in “inner exile” in Bonn provided narratives of European literary history that minimized the contribution of their native culture, and in so reworking the narrative of Western literature, they were able to reshape their own identities. Their reconstructions of past cultures can thus be read as attempts at self-reconstruction. Ultimately, however, the attempt by such scholars to distance themselves from German culture often faltered on the very Germanness of their cultural reconstructions.

Type
Studies
Information
Renaissance Quarterly , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , Summer 1994 , pp. 255 - 281
Copyright
Copyright © Renaissance Society of America 1994

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

For their help on this essay, the author would like to thank R. Howard Bloch, Joan Hart, Martin Jay, and Fred H. Matthews.

References

Alpers, Svetlana. The Art of Describing: Dutch Art in the Seventeenth Century. Chicago, 1983.Google Scholar
Baron, Hans, etal. “Symposium. ”Journal of the History of Ideas 4 (1943).Google Scholar
Cassirer, Ernst. “Giovanni Pico della Mirandola.” Journal of the History of Ideas 3 (1942): 123-44. 319-46.Google Scholar
Cassirer, Ernst. An Essay on Man: An Introduction to a Philosophy of Human Culture. New Haven, 1944.Google Scholar
Cassirer, Ernst. Paul Oskar Kristeller, and John Hermann Randall, Jr., ed. The Renaissance Philosophy of Man. Chicago, 1948.Google Scholar
Crawford, W. R., ed. The Cultural Migration: The European Scholar in America. Philadelphia, 1953.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Wallace. The Renaissance in Historical Thought: Five Centuries of Interpretation. Cambridge, MA, 1948.Google Scholar
Fleming, Donald and Bailyn, Bernard. The Intellectual Migration: Europe and America, 1930-1960. Cambridge, MA, 1969.Google Scholar
Gilson, Etienne. Reason and Revelation in the Middle Ages. New York, 1938.Google Scholar
Graff, Gerald. Professing Literature: An Institutional History. Chicago, 1986.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Clement. “Avant-Garde and Kitsch.” Partisan Review 6 (1939): 34-49.Google Scholar
Greene, T. M., ed. The Meaning of the Humanities [1955]. Port Washington, NY, 1969.Google Scholar
Hasenmueller, Christine. “Panofsky, Iconography, and Semiotics. ”Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 36 (1978): 298-301.Google Scholar
Haskins, C. H. The Twelfth-Century Renaissance. Cambridge, MA, 1927.Google Scholar
Hoeveler, J. David. The New Humanism: A Critique of Modern America, 1900-1940. Charlottesville, 1977.Google Scholar
Holly, Michael Ann. Panofsky and the Foundations of Art History. Ithaca, 1984.Google Scholar
Landauer, Carl. “Mimesis and Erich Auerbach's Self-Mythologizing.” German Studies Review 11 (1988): 83-96.Google Scholar
Metropolitan Museum of Art. The Renaissance: A Symposium. New York, 1953.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. Die deutsche Plastik des elften bis dreizehnten Jahrhunderts. Munich, 1924.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. “Die Perspektive als ‘symbolische Form'.” Vörträge der Bibliothek Warburg 1924-25 (1927): 258–330.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. Hercules am Scheidewege und andere antike Bildstoffe in der neueren Kunst. Leipzig and Berlin, 1930.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. Studies in Iconology: Humanistic Themes in the Art of the Renaissance. New York, 1939.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. “Renaissance and Renascences.” Kenyon Review (1944): 201-36.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. “Renaissance and Renascences.” Kenyon Review (1944): 201-36.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. Abbot Suger on the Abbey Church of St.- Denis and Its Art Treasures. Princeton, 1946.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. Early Netherlandish Art. New York, 1953.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. Meaning in the Visual Arts. New York, 1955.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. “In Defense of the Ivory Tower [1953].” Centennial Review of Arts and Science 1 (1957): 111-22.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. “Artist, Scientist, Genius: Notes on the ‘Renaissance-Dämmerung'.” In Ferguson, Wallace K. et al., The Renaissance: Six Essays, 121-82. New York, 1962.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin.The Life and Art of Alhrecht Diirer [1943]. Princeton, 1971.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. Renaissance and Renascences in Western Art [1960]. New York, 1972.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. Gothic Architecture and Scholasticism [1951]. New York, 1976.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin and Saxl, Fritz. “Classical Mythology in Medieval Art.” Metropolitan Museum Studies 4 (1933): 228-80.Google Scholar
Panofsky, Erwin. and Tarkington, Booth. Dr. Panofsky and Mr. Tarkington: An Exchange of Letters, 1938-1944. Princeton, 1974.Google Scholar
Ringer, Fritz. The Decline of the German Mandarins: The German Academic Community, 1890-1933. Cambridge, MA, 1969.Google Scholar
Struever, Nancy. “Panofsky and History.” Lecture at the College Art Association Convention, 1985.Google Scholar
Tate, Allen. The Man of Letters in the Modern World. New York, 1955.Google Scholar
Warburg, Aby. “Italianische Kunst und internationale Astrologie im Palazzo Schifanoia zu Ferrara.” Ausgewählte Schriften und Würdigen, Baden-Baden (1979): 173 — 98.Google Scholar
Wellek, René. A History of Modern Criticism: 1750-1950. vol. 4. New Haven, 1986.Google Scholar
Wuttke, Dieter. Aby M. Warburgs Methode als Anregung und Aufgabe. Göttingen, 1977.Google Scholar