DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.67683#0010
iv
PREFACE
cially, should be used only with the understanding that works of
art cannot be classified dogmatically; they are too closely inter-
related for that. The statue may be a decoration of a building, an
integral part of the structure and determined by it. The painting
frequently decorates a great wall surface or the page of a manu-
script and much of its composition and color is determined by
its use and its technique. The stained-glass window plays its
part in the whole interior ensemble and is not merely an example
of the minor arts. Until within the last two hundred years
artists were craftsmen and frequently one man pursued several
crafts equally well. Pheidias was painter as well as sculptor;
Leonardo was engineer, musician, painter, and sculptor; Piero
della Francesca was a mathematician; in fact, in the Renaissance
it was the rule and not the exception that a man could, for
example, build a palace, carve a statue, paint a ceiling, and
design and execute a piece of jewelry. Individualism and speciali-
zation are modern. Until recent times the differentiation so
frequently heard of “major” and “minor” did not exist.
By the term minor arts we designate jewelry, books and manu-
scripts, textiles, furniture, ceramics, the work of the goldsmith
and ivory carver — all that world of smaller objects, minor only
in size, through which creative ability has found abundant ex-
pression and for which there seems to be no adequately inclusive
term.1
With these qualifications, the method here followed, it has
been found, enables the student to develop a broader and deeper
capacity of appreciation and understanding and also to make a
more vital correlation among all fine arts: to read Homer in the
light of Minoan art; to feel the music and the dance of India in
Rajput painting and in the Khmer reliefs; to read the thoughts
and aspirations of the Middle Ages in the Gothic cathedral; the
Romantic movement of the nineteenth century in Delacroix; and
the poetry of China in Chinese landscape painting.
In order to cover so vast a field in one volume, unsparing elim-
ination has been necessary; each age must be treated as a whole,
and only significant movements considered. For this reason bio-
graphical details and amusing but irrelevant anecdotes have been
almost entirely omitted and even well-known artists left unmen-
tioned, as this kind of material can easily be found in most libra-
ries. Controversial questions of attribution and influences have
also been omitted as belonging properly to specialized books.
1 “Allied arts,” “crafts” or “handicrafts,” “derivative arts,” and “industrial arts” have also
been used.
PREFACE
cially, should be used only with the understanding that works of
art cannot be classified dogmatically; they are too closely inter-
related for that. The statue may be a decoration of a building, an
integral part of the structure and determined by it. The painting
frequently decorates a great wall surface or the page of a manu-
script and much of its composition and color is determined by
its use and its technique. The stained-glass window plays its
part in the whole interior ensemble and is not merely an example
of the minor arts. Until within the last two hundred years
artists were craftsmen and frequently one man pursued several
crafts equally well. Pheidias was painter as well as sculptor;
Leonardo was engineer, musician, painter, and sculptor; Piero
della Francesca was a mathematician; in fact, in the Renaissance
it was the rule and not the exception that a man could, for
example, build a palace, carve a statue, paint a ceiling, and
design and execute a piece of jewelry. Individualism and speciali-
zation are modern. Until recent times the differentiation so
frequently heard of “major” and “minor” did not exist.
By the term minor arts we designate jewelry, books and manu-
scripts, textiles, furniture, ceramics, the work of the goldsmith
and ivory carver — all that world of smaller objects, minor only
in size, through which creative ability has found abundant ex-
pression and for which there seems to be no adequately inclusive
term.1
With these qualifications, the method here followed, it has
been found, enables the student to develop a broader and deeper
capacity of appreciation and understanding and also to make a
more vital correlation among all fine arts: to read Homer in the
light of Minoan art; to feel the music and the dance of India in
Rajput painting and in the Khmer reliefs; to read the thoughts
and aspirations of the Middle Ages in the Gothic cathedral; the
Romantic movement of the nineteenth century in Delacroix; and
the poetry of China in Chinese landscape painting.
In order to cover so vast a field in one volume, unsparing elim-
ination has been necessary; each age must be treated as a whole,
and only significant movements considered. For this reason bio-
graphical details and amusing but irrelevant anecdotes have been
almost entirely omitted and even well-known artists left unmen-
tioned, as this kind of material can easily be found in most libra-
ries. Controversial questions of attribution and influences have
also been omitted as belonging properly to specialized books.
1 “Allied arts,” “crafts” or “handicrafts,” “derivative arts,” and “industrial arts” have also
been used.