No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The role of the public in the success of artistic styles
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
Extract
The interrelation between creative artists and their public, and active participation on the part of the public in the ‘social production of art’ seems to be a point of consensus in recent sociological literature on art (Becker 1982; Peterson 1976; Wolff 1981). The theoretical consensus is based upon empirical studies which, while focusing on the public, attack a variety of questions. Some of them deal with the socioeconomic characteristics of groups which appreciate different kinds of art and with socioeconomic bases for different kinds and degrees of art appreciation (Bourdieu and Darbel 1969; DiMaggio and Useem 1978a, b). Others try to explain the emergence and/or success of certain styles by the demands and interests of the public. To the extent that ‘public’ refers to the immediate social networks of the artists, such as colleagues, friends, critics, patrons or art dealers, details of influences can be frequently traced in artistic subjects and techniques, and the existence of influences can be verified by investigations of correspondence, memoirs and other documentary material (Haskell 1963; White and White 1965; Zolberg 1982). But these are of little help when it comes to the large impersonal public whose members are unknown to the artist or, as a rule, to the historian and the sociologist as well. For earlier periods, until about the middle of the nineteenth century, it is possible to make plausible inferences. Publics interested in and supporting art and artists were as a rule aristocratic, clerical or upper bourgeois groups, whose tastes and views have been recorded (Baxandall 1972; Watt 1957).
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- European Journal of Sociology / Archives Européennes de Sociologie , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , May 1984 , pp. 83 - 98
- Copyright
- Copyright © Archives Européenes de Sociology 1984
References
Baxandall, M. (1972), Painting and Experience in Fifteenth Century Italy (Oxford, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. and Darbel, A. (1969), L'amour de l'art: les musées d'art européens et leur public (Paris, éditions de Minuit, first edition 1966).Google Scholar
DiMaggio, P. and Useem, M. (1978 a), Cultural democracy in a period of cultural expansion: the social composition of arts audiences in the United States, Social Problems, XXVI, 179–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiMaggio, P. and Useem, M. (1978 b), Social class and arts consumption, Theory and Society, Nr 5, 141–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerth, H. H. and Mills, C. W. (1958), From Max Weber: essays in sociology (New York, Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Gould, G. and Kolb, W. L. (1964), A Dictionary of the Social Sciences (London, Tavistock Publications).Google Scholar
Haskell, F. (1963), Patrons and Painters: a study in the relationships between Italian art and society in the age of the baroque (New York, Alfred A. Knopf).Google Scholar
Peterson, R. A. (1976) (ed. and introductory article), The Production of Culture (London, Sage).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peterson, R. A. (1982), Social correlates of five patterns of arts participation, Annual Conference on the Arts and Social Theory, St. Paul, Mn.Google Scholar
Rosenblum, B. (1978), Style as Social Process, American Sociological Review, XLIII, 422–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schücking, L. L. (1944), The Sociology of the Literary Taste (London, K. Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co) (first German edition 1923).Google Scholar
Watt, I. (1957), The Rise of the Novel: studies in Defoe, Richardson and Fielding (Berkeley, University of California Press).Google Scholar
White, H. C. and White, C. A. (1965), Canvases and Careers: institutional change in the French painting world (New York, Wiley).Google Scholar
Zolberg, V. (1982), New Art—New Patrons: coincidence or causality in the twentieth century avant-garde, paper for presentation at the X World Congress of Sociology, Mexico.Google Scholar