‘Visual Culture: A New Paradigm William Innes Homer American Art, Vol. 12, No. 1 (Spring, 1998), 6-9. Stable URL: http:inks,jstor.oeg/sic sici=1073-9300%-28199821%29 1293 A 1%3C5%IAVCANP%IE2.0.COIBL-Z. American Art i currently published by Smithsonian American Art Museum, ‘Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at https! www jstororgfabouterms.ttnl. ISTOR’s Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and ‘you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use ofthis work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at hpeduwowystororgfiournals/smith. hen, Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyrigi¢ notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is an independent not-for-profit organization dedicated to eresting and presecving a digital archive ot scholarly journals. For more information regarding ISTOR, please contaet suppor @jsor.org, hitp:i/www jstor.ora/ Tue Jan 4 14:41:23 2005‘William Innes Homer Commentary Visual Culcure A New Paradigm ‘Within the past three or four years, the phenomenon known as visual culeure (often. capitalized} has come into its own aa fresh approach to objects and images—a kind of “new, new art history,” to borrow ftom zethistorian Marsha Meskimmon. The cise of this ssovel approach suggests thar there is something wrong with arc history as it has been practiced, afield tradicionally concerned with "cranshistorical euchs, timeless warks of ars, and unchanging critical ceiteri.” Visual culeure has already replaced the typical chtono- logical art history survey at places like Harvard, Swarthmore, and the University of California, Sanca Barbara. Ac Harvard, for exaraple, the new course (dating from 1994) treats che material chematically and “introduces scudents to the history of methods and debates in che field, rather chan asking chem 19 memorize names, dates, and works of ar.” Books on visual culcure, such as Visual Culsure: Images and Interpretations (1994), edited by Norman Bryson, Michael Ann Holly, and Keith Moxey; Gaod Loaking: Essays on the Virtue of Images (1996) by Barbara Seafford; and Language of Visual (1996), edited by Beate Albert, are beginning co roll from the presses. And this new approach is starting to ‘make ineoads in the sessions held ac the annual mecting of the College Are Association. Significantly, W. J. T. Mitchell's book Picture Theory: Bess an Verbal and Visual Repre= sentation (1994) won the Charles Rufus Macey Prize offered by its namesake organiaation in 1995. Yer, in spite of this recognition, visual culture pursued to is Logical conclusion ‘is not a tweaking of arc history,” as Anne Higonner has pointed out. Ieis, rather, “a fandamental distuption."' Bur unlike traditional arc history, it has as yet no theories and no master narrative. Iris a youthfal, amorphous medium thac is still ying to find its own idencivy In his book and in cwo recent articles, Mitchell has characterized visual culture better ‘than anyone to date. He points oue cha the new field—“the study of the social conseruc- tion of visual experience”—represents a “pictorial curn” chae permeates a whole variety of fields and disciplines. Ir requires, he says, “conversations among art historians, fl scholars, optical cechnologises and theorists, phenomenologists, psychoanalysts, and anthropologists.” The construction of visual culture is chus interdisciplinary, bue he warns us that its practitioners should avoid a fashionable, glib incerdisciplinarity for is own sake. Mitchell prefers the idea of "indiscipline," his code word for remaining faithful to one discipline while probing new areas of inquiry like visual culture. Mitchell, however, consistently tips his hat to a variety of disciplines to which visual culture should be responsive—“art history, literary and media studies, and cultural studies.”* 6 Spring 1998‘Thomas Eakin Peptic Drege Th Perel Shall Wench eee on pope 4097 1208 Cate amin) akan Nlscamothn Ths Steen Horse ind Like the estionalized viaal fl in Ekin's drawing, the multid mensional nature of visual culeure has challenged many ae hisocians co ake a more peneuacing look, Visual cutcure, unlike craditional arc history, may concern itself with mass culture and the popular acts (ic shares this interest with culeural studies, but Mitchell cautions us not co regard visual culcure as che “visual franc" of cultural studies) For this reason, visual ‘culture finds a nacural home in film studics programs and departments. Yec visual culeure, unlike the orientation of film programs to contemporary or recent materials, can easily address itself tothe remate past Image versus text has become the central issue among advocates of what I call che new visualiry. Because we live in world filled with images, we should, Mitebell contends, address picures in out studies with the kind of reverence we traditionally hold for texts ‘The new discipline offers an antidote to the preoccupation with cexcualty associated with the scructuralism and poststruccuralism of the 1970s and 1980s, when everything became a text and much critical cheary was dominated by the internal dialogue berween one tex¢ and another. Visual culvure, by contrast, relies in large part on sensory experience— parcicularly the visual—and this reliance provides a welcome relief to che self eferencial ‘world of linguistic relations. Barbara Stafford apuly arciculated his tension when she weote in her 1996 book: “I am arguing that we need to disescablish the view of cognition a8 dominancly and aggressively linguistic. Ic is narcissistic tribal compulsion co overempha- size the agency of Jagas {the word] and annihilate rival iraginaries.”® Stafford is pechaps the mast vehement and vocal advocate for the visual. She feels chat far coo much attention has been given to word-text-oriented thinking and that che visual 7 American Art