Sappol 2006: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:"Neither Vesalius nor his artists could conceive of, or desire, a work governed entirely by austere naturalism. Quite the contrary, they wanted to entertain their readers and themselves. They responded to a pervasive cultural expectation that governed printed images in early modern Europe: the illustration should be, in some way, delightful, and should tell a story. So when Vesalius entered the scene, things got more scientific, but also wittier and more theatrical." (17) | :"Neither Vesalius nor his artists could conceive of, or desire, a work governed entirely by austere naturalism. Quite the contrary, they wanted to entertain their readers and themselves. They responded to a pervasive cultural expectation that governed printed images in early modern Europe: the illustration should be, in some way, delightful, and should tell a story. So when Vesalius entered the scene, things got more scientific, but also wittier and more theatrical." (17) | ||
between 1680 and 1800, conventions shifted; "suddenly a boundary separated art and science -- a rift that ran right through death and the dead boy. Art and science came to be defined in mutually exclusive ways. That separation still has force today." (25) | |||
Bacon; invoked anatomy "as an exemplary science, a method of systematic observation and discovery that went beneath the surface of things and discerned the parts of a larger natural order that could only be known through detailed, piecemeal exploration" (26) | |||
Revision as of 21:39, 22 February 2011
- "Until the invention of X-ray imaging, sonograms, CT scans, MRIs, and the like, the only way to see into ourselves was through the dissection of dead human beings. The dissected cadaver was our mirror." (6)
- "The anatomist was a performer. Anatomy required showmanship." (6)
- "Neither Vesalius nor his artists could conceive of, or desire, a work governed entirely by austere naturalism. Quite the contrary, they wanted to entertain their readers and themselves. They responded to a pervasive cultural expectation that governed printed images in early modern Europe: the illustration should be, in some way, delightful, and should tell a story. So when Vesalius entered the scene, things got more scientific, but also wittier and more theatrical." (17)
between 1680 and 1800, conventions shifted; "suddenly a boundary separated art and science -- a rift that ran right through death and the dead boy. Art and science came to be defined in mutually exclusive ways. That separation still has force today." (25)
Bacon; invoked anatomy "as an exemplary science, a method of systematic observation and discovery that went beneath the surface of things and discerned the parts of a larger natural order that could only be known through detailed, piecemeal exploration" (26)