Max Imdahl and His ‘Ikonik’

  • S. S. Vaneyan Lomonosov Moscow State University
Keywords: Imdahl, Sedlmayr, Panofsky, Giotto, Pieter Bruegel the Elder, hermeneutics, receptive aesthetics, the semantic structure of an artwork

Abstract

Max Imdahl is situated on the border between the theory and practice of visual arts. His life is an experience of combining academic art history with cutting-edge art criticism. His ‘ikonik’ was intended as a continuation and completion of the methodological development of art history from iconography to iconology. Instead of the hermeneutics of the immanent meaning of an artwork, the semantics of an act of vision becomes the object of his interpretation, and criticism of cognitive capacities of language as a means of articulating artistic experience becomes his purpose. Imdahl juxtaposes his ‘ikonik’ as a theologised variant of receptive aesthetics with Hans Sedlmayr’s structural analysis. For Imdahl, Sedlmayr falls under suspicion for his all too static picture of the semantic element of an artwork, which, according to Sedlmayr, is divided into layers of meaning, unified by a single irrational (“endothymic”) basis. By contrast, ‘ikonik’ refers to the semantics emerging as simultaneous affects of the act of vision, which embraces dynamic oppositions of meaning, having a scenographic and choreographic character. Thus, the interaction with an artwork is equated to a performative act, which ensures the apophatic growth of meaning and the approach to the Revelation. The tropological decomposition of the structures of the contemplative mind (Sedlmayr) is continued by the eschatological deconstruction of the verbal discourse in the form of art history (Imdahl).

Author Biography

S. S. Vaneyan, Lomonosov Moscow State University

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34680/vistheo-2021-1-131-141

Stepan Vaneyan 
Lomonosov Moscow State University
Research Institute of Theory and History of Fine Arts
The State Institute for Art Studies, Moscow, Russia
vaneyans@gmail.com
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5890-1360

Abstract
Max Imdahl is situated on the border between the theory and practice of visual arts. His life is an experience of combining academic art history with cutting-edge art criticism. His ‘ikonik’ was intended as a continuation and completion of the methodological development of art history from iconography to iconology. Instead of the hermeneutics of the immanent meaning of an artwork, the semantics of an act of vision becomes the object of his interpretation, and criticism of cognitive capacities of language as a means of articulating artistic experience becomes his purpose. Imdahl juxtaposes his ‘ikonik’ as a theologised variant of receptive aesthetics with Hans Sedlmayr’s structural analysis. For Imdahl, Sedlmayr falls under suspicion for his all too static picture of the semantic element of an artwork, which, according to Sedlmayr, is divided into layers of meaning, unified by a single irrational (“endothymic”) basis. By contrast, ‘ikonik’ refers to the semantics emerging as simultaneous affects of the act of vision, which embraces dynamic oppositions of meaning, having a scenographic and choreographic character. Thus, the interaction with an artwork is equated to a performative act, which ensures the apophatic growth of meaning and the approach to the Revelation. The tropological decomposition of the structures of the contemplative mind (Sedlmayr) is continued by the eschatological deconstruction of the verbal discourse in the form of art history (Imdahl).

Keywords: Imdahl, Sedlmayr, Panofsky, Giotto, Pieter Bruegel the Elder, hermeneutics, receptive aesthetics, the semantic structure of an artwork

References

Bätschmann 1984 – Bätschmann O. Einführung in die kunstgeschichtliche Hermeneutik: Die Auslegung von Bildern. Darmstadt, 1984.

Betthausen et al. 2007 – Betthausen P., Feist P. H., Fork C. Max Imdahl. Metzler Kunsthistoriker Lexikon: 210 Porträts deutschsprachiger Autoren aus vier Jahrhunderten. Stuttgart, 2007. S. 200–203.

Boehm et al. 1985 – Modernität und Tradition: Festschrift für Max Imdahl zum 60. Geburtstag. Hg. von G. Boehm, K. Stierle and G. Winter. München, 1985.

Imdahl 1973 – Imdahl M. Über einige narrative Strukturen in der Arenafresken Giottos. Geschichte, Ereignis und Erzählung.
Hg. von R. Koselleck. München, 1973. S. 155–173.

Imdahl 1979 – Imdahl M. Giotto. Zur Frage der ikonischen Struktur. München, 1979.

Imdahl 1980 – Imdahl M. Giotto. Arenafresken: Ikonographie, Ikonologie, Ikonik. München, 1980.

Imdahl 1982 – Imdahl M. Arbeiter diskutieren moderne Kunst. Seminare im Bayerwerk Leverkusen. Berlin, 1982.

Imdahl 1990 – Imdahl M. Bis an die Grenze des Aussagbaren. Kunsthistoriker in eigener Sache. Zehn autobiographische Skizzen. Hg. von M. Sitt. Berlin, 1990. S. 245–272.

Imdahl 1994 – Imdahl M. Kunstgeschichtliche Exkurse zur Perraults “Parallèle des Anciens et des Modernes”. Perrault Ch. Parallèle des Anciens et des Modernes. München, 1964. P. 65–81.

Imdahl 1996 a – Imdahl M. Gesammelte Schriften. Bd. 1: Zur Kunst der Moderne. Hg. von A. Janhsen-Vukićević. Frankfurt am Main, 1996.

Imdahl 1996 b – Imdahl M. Gesammelte Schriften. Band 2: Zur Kunst der Tradition. Hg. von G. Winter. Frankfurt am Main, 1996.

Imdahl 1996 c – Imdahl M. Gesammelte Schriften. Band 3: Reflexion – Theorie – Methode. Hg. von G. Boehm. Frankfurt am Main, 1996.

Imdahl 2011 – Imdahl M. Experience of a Different Vision. Articles about the Art of the 10th – 20th centuries. Transl. into Russian by
A. Weisband. Kiev, 2011.

Kohle 2008 – Kohle H. Max Imdahl. Klassiker der Kunstgeschichte. Bd. 2: Von Panofsky bis Greenberg. Hg. von U. Pfisterer. München, 2008. S. 217–225.

Mitchell 1986 – Mitchell W. J. T. Iconology: Image, Text, Ideology. Chicago, 1986.

Sedlmayr 1951 – Sedlmayr H. Jan Vermeer – Der Ruhm der Malkunst. Festschrift für Hans Jantzen. Hg. von K. Bauch. Berlin, 1951. S. 169–177.

Sedlmayr 1957 – Sedlmayr H. Pieter Breugel: Der Sturz der Blinden. Hefte des Kunsthistorischen Seminars der Universität München. Band 2. München, 1957. S. 1–48.

Stöhr 2010 – Auch Theorien haben ihre Schicksale: Max Imdahl –
Paul de Man – Beat Wyss. Eine Einfühlung in die Kunstgeschichtsschreibung der Moderne. Hg. von J. Stöhr. Bielefeld, 2010.

Vaneyan 2016 – Vaneyan S. S. Bruegel – Sedlmayr – Imdahl: The Blind Spot of Interpretation. Memory as an Object and Tool of Art History. Ed. by E. A. Bobrinskaya, A. S. Korndorf. Moscow, 2016. P. 86–100.
In Russian.

About author

Stepan S. Vaneyan
Dr. Sci. (Art History), Professor of Art History Department.
Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia
E-mail: vaneyans@gmail.com

For citation:
Vaneyan S. S. Max Imdahl and His ‘Ikonik’. Journal of Visual Theology. 2021. 1 (4). P. 131–141.
https://doi.org/10.34680/vistheo-2021-1-131-141

Published
2021-06-28
Section
Articles
Views
411
Downloads
342