DOI Heft:
Nr. 1
DOI Artikel:Woodfield, Richard: Ernst Gombrich and Max Dvořák
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.31179#0127
ŠTÚDIE / ARTICLES
HI.
ARS 44, 2011, 1
Ernst Gombrich and Max Dvorak
Richard WOODFIELD
"DwEiG.. nw AwA /w Az?/ Ay z?r/ o/* Aypz?y/ opyryz/ z?/2
/AwyAkA z?/?z/ yxX/Ag z?cryyy A /Ař wAzf o/ ^go/?y z?gyy."^
"... wy z??7z?AoAyz/Mř^y z?/2z/pro^Awyprow o/?r Az7Ay/y,
^22/ wy AAryy/y ^ 0/2 z? yyrt zfpGyVpA/2y.""
Ernst Gombrich often said that the issues that
he raised in his school-ieaving essay, lFz?/2zA?/2gy/2 A
z/yr X22/2tAy/rz?AA/2g (G iw !G2'/2y/%yA2z?/2/2 A4 p?/^Ap,
continued to preoccupy him through his life. As
that was the place where he hrst wrote about Max
Dvorâk's Xw/r^rA/'AA z?A GArArgyrA/AA it seems like
a good place to start my páper.
The FXi^izzA^zX
Gombrich's school-leaving essay is remarkable
for its ambition to interpret and evaluate art his-
torical writing as, itself, a product of history. It is
noteworthy that his central concern was the way
in which art history had been written and was not,
of itself, art historical. It was art historiographical
and his hrst exercise in commentary or XAAG It
used extensive quotations from the authors under
I am deeply indebted to Joanne Adams for her translation of
Gombrich's HzwyzzrAAand Karl johns (Los Angeles, Ariadne
Press) for his translation of all of the Bodonyi Review. I also
owe a huge debt to Sir Ernst himself for conversations ex-
tending from 1986 to a year before his death and permission
to publish from his papers.
' GOMBRICH, E. H.: Focus on the Arts and Humanities.
In: GOMBRICH, E. H.: TAV/zr.* Xtzprz/zry of Ozzr CwXrA
TrzzA'Aw. Oxford 1984, p. 14.
considération, thematizing historical periods and
treating their évolution in a Hegelian manner as a
dialectical movement between reason and passion.
It studied and critically evaluated fluctuations in the
judgement of artworks. He concluded his analysis
by predicting that:
"...à* ww zpproz?A wzX z?Ary A /G A/z/fy zp z?/p ow <Gy<A
tw ro^yo/2, o' *//ow op'^A/AG 1 - - - pw Ař yyhoz/y rpirz'tz'^/z?-
zA<?y p AA /20W woyywo/2/ z? wo/P p z?A w?A X /Az?/ A ^z?y
z?/A^yy ^oo/2 A Ař pow^/y p n?z?yo/2 z?/2z/ Az* owoPo//y, A A<?
yyy z?//zf A Az Gz?X.' ZAp^Acz."^
The essay was not so much an exercise in art
history, which would hâve been a direct response to
artworks, as a commentary on the practice of writ-
ing about the subject, which was an investigation
into uses of language. It was also an investigation
into the nature of the discipline. Its main sections
considered: I — "The work of art as the work of
thought"; II — "The work of art as sensuous experi-
ence"; III - "The work of art as an organism"; IV
— "The work of art as an outpouring of the soul"; V
— "The Historians - the work of art as document";
VI - "The Artists — the work of art as a work of art";
^ EWAygz% /% Ar KwvAzAzzrAzzyg (l/zw lEArÁzA,M%/z Vf gyr
Jz/yzý). Hz77?rz7rAÀ AyEr/yy/GzwAwA js.l.] 1928, ms., cited by
courtesy of Sir Ernst.
^ Ibidem, p. 78: "... zAzr '?2z%z% GrWAzX A Ar fGTyyA'/zrzWzr
przpXyzzz??, AzJAVA Az ErrTzygzwrApz?? Ar rzrX7gzgzzygz7?z% E%2-
zVAAyg, yy Ar A zry/zrEz'Az ^yzrzwzÁzAzy
Á7?zr Bzrz/ Arzi zz/zziAr Arz/z zrzzy/z Dzr?rz2zr Ay EzzyyyAzrA
zz/zz^ yzA wzzyy, zrzzy zy Ay<ózr Ar? L zrf2zz/zz/ zzzzz/ Gpz'^^ Ar? Mygz
zzzzzi Ar? Lfzryz/y, irzzr.* Er/zAA."
' Ernst Gombrich's response to an essay by Ján Bakoš in
WOODFIELD, R. (ed.): GorWA ozzMAzzAPyyz^z/ogy. Man-
chester 1986, p. 260.
125
HI.
ARS 44, 2011, 1
Ernst Gombrich and Max Dvorak
Richard WOODFIELD
"DwEiG.. nw AwA /w Az?/ Ay z?r/ o/* Aypz?y/ opyryz/ z?/2
/AwyAkA z?/?z/ yxX/Ag z?cryyy A /Ař wAzf o/ ^go/?y z?gyy."^
"... wy z??7z?AoAyz/Mř^y z?/2z/pro^Awyprow o/?r Az7Ay/y,
^22/ wy AAryy/y ^ 0/2 z? yyrt zfpGyVpA/2y.""
Ernst Gombrich often said that the issues that
he raised in his school-ieaving essay, lFz?/2zA?/2gy/2 A
z/yr X22/2tAy/rz?AA/2g (G iw !G2'/2y/%yA2z?/2/2 A4 p?/^Ap,
continued to preoccupy him through his life. As
that was the place where he hrst wrote about Max
Dvorâk's Xw/r^rA/'AA z?A GArArgyrA/AA it seems like
a good place to start my páper.
The FXi^izzA^zX
Gombrich's school-leaving essay is remarkable
for its ambition to interpret and evaluate art his-
torical writing as, itself, a product of history. It is
noteworthy that his central concern was the way
in which art history had been written and was not,
of itself, art historical. It was art historiographical
and his hrst exercise in commentary or XAAG It
used extensive quotations from the authors under
I am deeply indebted to Joanne Adams for her translation of
Gombrich's HzwyzzrAAand Karl johns (Los Angeles, Ariadne
Press) for his translation of all of the Bodonyi Review. I also
owe a huge debt to Sir Ernst himself for conversations ex-
tending from 1986 to a year before his death and permission
to publish from his papers.
' GOMBRICH, E. H.: Focus on the Arts and Humanities.
In: GOMBRICH, E. H.: TAV/zr.* Xtzprz/zry of Ozzr CwXrA
TrzzA'Aw. Oxford 1984, p. 14.
considération, thematizing historical periods and
treating their évolution in a Hegelian manner as a
dialectical movement between reason and passion.
It studied and critically evaluated fluctuations in the
judgement of artworks. He concluded his analysis
by predicting that:
"...à* ww zpproz?A wzX z?Ary A /G A/z/fy zp z?/p ow <Gy<A
tw ro^yo/2, o' *//ow op'^A/AG 1 - - - pw Ař yyhoz/y rpirz'tz'^/z?-
zA<?y p AA /20W woyywo/2/ z? wo/P p z?A w?A X /Az?/ A ^z?y
z?/A^yy ^oo/2 A Ař pow^/y p n?z?yo/2 z?/2z/ Az* owoPo//y, A A<?
yyy z?//zf A Az Gz?X.' ZAp^Acz."^
The essay was not so much an exercise in art
history, which would hâve been a direct response to
artworks, as a commentary on the practice of writ-
ing about the subject, which was an investigation
into uses of language. It was also an investigation
into the nature of the discipline. Its main sections
considered: I — "The work of art as the work of
thought"; II — "The work of art as sensuous experi-
ence"; III - "The work of art as an organism"; IV
— "The work of art as an outpouring of the soul"; V
— "The Historians - the work of art as document";
VI - "The Artists — the work of art as a work of art";
^ EWAygz% /% Ar KwvAzAzzrAzzyg (l/zw lEArÁzA,M%/z Vf gyr
Jz/yzý). Hz77?rz7rAÀ AyEr/yy/GzwAwA js.l.] 1928, ms., cited by
courtesy of Sir Ernst.
^ Ibidem, p. 78: "... zAzr '?2z%z% GrWAzX A Ar fGTyyA'/zrzWzr
przpXyzzz??, AzJAVA Az ErrTzygzwrApz?? Ar rzrX7gzgzzygz7?z% E%2-
zVAAyg, yy Ar A zry/zrEz'Az ^yzrzwzÁzAzy
Á7?zr Bzrz/ Arzi zz/zziAr Arz/z zrzzy/z Dzr?rz2zr Ay EzzyyyAzrA
zz/zz^ yzA wzzyy, zrzzy zy Ay<ózr Ar? L zrf2zz/zz/ zzzzz/ Gpz'^^ Ar? Mygz
zzzzzi Ar? Lfzryz/y, irzzr.* Er/zAA."
' Ernst Gombrich's response to an essay by Ján Bakoš in
WOODFIELD, R. (ed.): GorWA ozzMAzzAPyyz^z/ogy. Man-
chester 1986, p. 260.
125