The article discusses how art history inadequately addresses the physical thickness of paintings, particularly in relation to primary artist Baer. Museums often only provide height and width, omitting depth, which suggests an outdated adherence to medium specificity. This limitation can diminish understanding of a work's true nature. The article also highlights a specific instance where the terminology used in art documentation fails to accurately convey artist intentions, emphasizing a disconnect between the physicality of artwork and traditional recording methods.
It may also be a remnant of a gallery system that aims to sell paintings that fit on patrons' walls.
The lexicon of art history often fails when it comes to naming the surfaces of modern painting.
Collection
[
|
...
]