Animism, Materiality, and Museums How Do Byzantine Things Feel?

Among our most cherished modern assumptions is our distance from the material world we claim to love or, alternately, to dominate and own. As both devotional tool and art object, the Byzantine icon is rendered complicit in this distancing. According to well-established theological and scholarly expl...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Peers, Glenn (auth)
Format: Electronic Book Chapter
Language:English
Published: Arc Humanities Press 2021
Series:Collection Development, Cultural Heritage, and Digital Humanities
Subjects:
Online Access:OAPEN Library: download the publication
OAPEN Library: description of the publication
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000naaaa2200000uu 4500
001 oapen_2024_20_500_12657_43193
005 20201207
003 oapen
006 m o d
007 cr|mn|---annan
008 20201207s2021 xx |||||o ||| 0|eng d
020 |a CDH-9781942401742 
040 |a oapen  |c oapen 
024 7 |a 10.17302/CDH-9781942401742  |c doi 
041 0 |a eng 
042 |a dc 
072 7 |a ACK  |2 bicssc 
072 7 |a GM  |2 bicssc 
072 7 |a HBLC  |2 bicssc 
100 1 |a Peers, Glenn  |4 auth 
245 1 0 |a Animism, Materiality, and Museums  |b How Do Byzantine Things Feel? 
260 |b Arc Humanities Press  |c 2021 
300 |a 1 electronic resource (167 p.) 
336 |a text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a computer  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a online resource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
490 1 |a Collection Development, Cultural Heritage, and Digital Humanities 
506 0 |a Open Access  |2 star  |f Unrestricted online access 
520 |a Among our most cherished modern assumptions is our distance from the material world we claim to love or, alternately, to dominate and own. As both devotional tool and art object, the Byzantine icon is rendered complicit in this distancing. According to well-established theological and scholarly explanations, the icon is a window onto the divine: it focuses and directs our minds to a higher understanding of God and saints. Despite their material richness, icons are understood to efface their own materiality, thereby enabling us to do the same. That the privileged relation of image to God is based on its capacity for material self-effacement is the basis for all theology of the icon and all art-historical description. It gets more complicated than this definition, to be sure, but the icon is positioned in this way in most straightforward accounts, whether devotional or scholarly. My position is to undermine the transcendentalizing determination of modern theology and aesthetics, and to lean very heavily on the materiality of these things to the point of allowing them, to the degree I can, a voice and life of their own. 
540 |a Creative Commons  |f https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/  |2 cc  |4 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 
546 |a English 
650 7 |a History of art: Byzantine & Medieval art c 500 CE to c 1400  |2 bicssc 
650 7 |a Museology & heritage studies  |2 bicssc 
650 7 |a Early history: c 500 to c 1450/1500  |2 bicssc 
653 |a Byzantine 
653 |a exhibition 
653 |a animism 
653 |a art 
653 |a christian animism 
653 |a museum experience 
653 |a visitor experience 
856 4 0 |a www.oapen.org  |u https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/d4669a30-ce84-47ca-a99e-626362ee4f54/9781942401742.pdf  |7 0  |z OAPEN Library: download the publication 
856 4 0 |a www.oapen.org  |u https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/43193  |7 0  |z OAPEN Library: description of the publication