Art history studies the historical development of art objects and their stylistic contexts. Mostly the objects of arts include architecture and sculpture. Others in the category may include painting, ceramics, and furniture among others. Style and periodisation have been used in the study of development of art since its emergence in the 19th century.
Periodisation of arts
Periodisation of arts on the other hand is an approach to art that attempts to divide the work of arts in to groups through time and space. The assumption in this approach is that the flow of work of arts has been continuous through time and space. The other assumption is that the art works within each period grouping have some significant common qualities or a quality (Orton and Pollock 23). The common qualities may be the aspects of art like thematic, stylistic, iconography among others. Periodisation is claimed to be very essential to educational enterprises today as it can be used to package information in to topics and courses.
Limitations of Periodisation
Periodisation as an approach to art has some limitations. First, periodisation influences the perception of the viewers about the quality of the art work in that they only view the qualities that are deemed vital for a particular period while others are overlooked.
It also contradicts against the nature of art works. This is because it incorporates the individuality of the artist to the uniqueness of the art work but does not consider the creativity of the artist. Uniqueness of an art is basically due to the creativity of the artist and cannot merely be used to characterize an art period.
Some critics also argue that the art history should not be divided, rather, it should be written in continuous record of events and interrelations (Orton and Pollock 45). The view here is that periodisation distorts the art history process.
It is also argued that periodisation should be neutral rather than being judgmental about the nature of interrelations between artworks.
Styles in arts
A style means the extent to which a work of art resembles another. Style studies art according to different ways the artists used to make art objects. It focuses on the changes in the art making styles. When art emerged in the 19th century, the art objects were made according to the technology level of that time line. Today the technology has advanced and the art objects are different fro the ways they used to be in the past.
Limitations of stylistic approach to art
If styles are used to study the development of arts, a problem will arise because the change of style from one period to another may depend on the creativity of the artist which may vary from one artist to another.
Art styles are not easily understood. When used to study art, they may not be meaningful to the viewers (Orton and Pollock 34). One needs to have some history of the origin of the art for him to understand the shapes, colors and textures used in the art.
Styles are subject to bias of the viewer. For instance, the art object showing an old man can be interpreted to mean the weakness. This is just because weakness is associated to old age. Art styles leave the viewer to make judgment about the meaning of the art work which may be erroneous. For one to understand about the true meaning of the art, they have to go back to history and learn about what the style represents. For instance, the art of American flag may easily be misunderstood. One, unless aware of the flag history, may misinterpret the symbols used like the stars and the stripes.
My opinion
Since the development of art depends mostly on the artist, the study of arts should three perspectives: the artist himself, the timeline and the change in technology over time with the key player being the artist.
Conclusion
Periodisation and style cannot be relied on to study art because of their narrow perspective and abstractness.
Works cited
Orton F. and Griselda Pollock. Art history. New York: Paul Chapman publishing Ltd, 1980