[1]
From: Jennifer Germann <jgermannithaca.edu>
Subject: CFP: Portraiture Before 1750

ASECS 2016 Session:
Portraiture Before 1750

Over the last decades, the topic of portraiture has generated significant scholarly interest. Much of this attention has been focused on painted portraits in the second half of the eighteenth century. This panel proposes to turn attention to the late seventeenth and early eighteenth century. What are the major trends or themes emerging in the practice of portraiture at this time? What about sculpted portraits or those incorporated into the decorative arts (such as in tapestries)? How are artists working internationally, within and beyond Europe? What cross-cultural exchanges are emerging with the expansion of colonial networks? Papers are welcomed from diverse cultural traditions around the globe engaging both the analysis of cross-cultural exchange in terms of the approaches to and forms of portraiture as well as facilitating the cross-cultural comparison of portrait traditions.

Please send abstracts or questions to Jennifer Germann
(jgermannithaca.edu). Deadline: 15.09.2015

--

[2]
From: Kathryn Desplanque <kathryn.despgmail.com>
Subject: CFP: Satirical Images

Session:
“Satirical Images: Between Sociability, Animosity, and Entertainment”
Kathryn Desplanque and Jessica Fripp

The use of graphic satire proliferated in the eighteenth century, from the caricature and portrait charges of the Grand Tour (Pier Leoni Ghezzi, Thomas Patch, Francois-Andre Vincent), to political caricature on the continent and in England, to the verbal-visual puns of broadside imagery and street cries series, to the complex allegories that criticized and supported the French Revolution. These different genres of graphic satire are difficult to reconcile because they vary widely in tone: some are oppositional, others are sociable, and others still seemed destined primarily for entertainment. Scholarship on eighteenth-century graphic satire has privileged oppositional and political imagery, neglecting the prolific sociable, amusing, and cultural caricatures whose imagery and tone are often more challenging to decode. Recent scholarship, such as The Efflorescence of Caricature (2010), The Saint-Aubin ‘Livre de caricatures’ (2012), L’Art de la caricature (2014), and Ann Bermingham’s 2015 Clifford Lecture, “Coffee-House Characters and British Visual Humor at the End of the Eighteenth Century,” has begun to bridge persistent gaps in the study of graphic satire, putting into conversation formerly disparate genres of satirical imagery. This panel seeks papers that nuance, overturn, or refine the categories applied to graphic satire—oppositional versus entertaining; political versus cultural; sociable versus slanderous. Possible topics might include, but are not limited to: satire (especially political satire) in the light of sociability; how the circulation of these images through commercial or social exchange relates to their format, including tone or medium; and how satire informs our understanding of relationships between individuals and groups, such as friendship, enmity, rivalry, or camaraderie.

Please email proposals to kathryn.desplanqueduke.edu AND j.fripptcu.edu by September 15, 2015

--

[3]
From: Daniella Berman <daniella.bermannyu.edu>
Subject: CFP: Framing the 18th Century: Borders and Peripheries in
Visual Culture

Call for Papers for the Session:
Framing the Eighteenth Century: Borders and Peripheries in Visual Culture

In its entry on bordure, the 1792 Dictionnaire des arts de peinture, sculpture, et gravure considers the dynamic between painting and frame, between border and center: “Cependant, d’apres les loix d’un gout éloigné de trop de sévérité, la bordure d’un tableau, ainsi que la parure d’une femme, ne doit point fixer les yeux, en les détournant trop de l’objet qu’elle embellit; mais l’une & l’autre doivent faire valoir les beautés dont elles sont l’ornement.”

Watelet and Levesque underscore the distinct remit of the central work of art and its border, in terms of iconographic program and decorative function. How do framing devices augment our understanding of the artworks they surround? How do borders and margins function in visual culture? How intentional is the association between picture plane and the embellishments on the fringe? How vital is the periphery to the center—artistically, and spatially? This panel will explore the complex and sometimes fraught relationship between the artwork and its frame, between the ornament and the ornamented, between the periphery and the center in visual culture of the long eighteenth century.

We welcome a variety of interpretations of the subject of borders and peripheries in the visual arts. Topics might include, but are not limited to, the role of borders in landscape architecture or manuscript illumination; relationships between (literal) framing, display, and status; re-woven tapestry borders; considerations of luxury and superfluity in artistic discourses; and examinations of the role of Paris versus the provinces in artistic production.

Please send abstracts to BOTH Blythe C. Sobol (?bcs265nyu.edu) and Daniella Berman (daniella.bermannyu.edu) by September 15.

--

[4]
From: Ryan Whyte <rwhytefaculty.ocadu.ca>
Subject: CFP: Artists' Artists in the Long Eighteenth Century

Session:
Artists' Artists in the Long Eighteenth Century

Session Chair:
Ryan Whyte, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Liberal Arts & Sciences, OCAD University, 100 McCaul Street, Toronto, ON, Canada, M5T 1W1; E-mail: rwhytefaculty.ocadu.ca

In the long eighteenth century, artists commissioned, collected, and published criticism of the work of fellow living artists. Superficially, artists' patronage and criticism of other artists appears consistent with the activities of the larger world of art, yet in fact it represents a parallel world of artistic engagement that was, and remains, at least partially inaccessible and incompletely understood beyond professional artistic circles. This session aims to shed light on artists' taste for one another's work in a period when the emergence of art criticism and periodic public exhibitions of contemporary art created tensions between the increasingly public nature of artists' careers, and the exclusive, technical nature of studio practice and language.

What did it mean when an artist--rather than a critic or a patron--favored the work of a fellow living artist? Who were considered "artists' artists," as reflected, for example, in artists' collections of one another's work, and why? To what extent was the notion of an "artist's artist" even understood beyond the confines of the studio? When artists commissioned, collected, and published criticism of the work of fellow living artists, how and why did their patronage and criticism depart from state and private initiatives? How did homages and rivalries manifest in artists' portraits of fellow living artists, so prevalent and sophisticated in this period? This session welcomes new approaches to these problems, including interdisciplinary and methodologically innovative papers.

For more information:
https://asecs.press.jhu.edu/Weekly%20Announcements/Final%202016%20Call%20for%20Papers.pdf

--

[5]
From: Noémie Etienne <ne477nyu.edu>
Subject: CFP: Life and/as Art in the Eighteenth Century.

Session:
Life and/as Art in the Eighteenth Century

Noémie Etienne (Getty Research Institute) and Meredith Martin (New York University)

During the eighteenth century, a whole series of artistic productions aimed to simulate motion and life, at the same time that individuals became ever more preoccupied with performing or embodying static works of art. This session aims to explore such hybrid creations and the boundaries they challenged between animate and inanimate form, art and technology, the living and the dead. Papers may focus on specific objects, such as the automata created by the clockmaker Pierre-Jacques Droz that imitated human acts of writing or harpsichord playing; hyperrealistic wax figures, sometimes displayed in groups or dioramas, that were used for entertainment as well as pedagogical and medical purposes; and “tableaux mécaniques,” mixed-media paintings with motors on the back that enabled the figures represented to move across their surfaces. Other possible topics include the staging of collaborative tableaux vivants in eighteenth-century theaters, gardens, and salons; and related attempts to resurrect or animate ancient artifacts, as in Emma Hamilton’s “living statue” performances. Papers that consider the eighteenth-century specificity of such artistic productions, introduce new methodological perspectives, or discuss relevant examples from outside of Europe are especially encouraged.

Please email submission to Noémie Etienne (ne477nyu.edu) and Meredith Martin (msm240nyu.edu) by September 15, 2015.