The Sociology Perspective Of Art History

As a new research method, Social history of art originally produced in1930s. In1970s, this research approach, alone with feminism, psychoanalysis visualrepresentation, semiotics and structuralism to analyze the meaning of symbols,form the highly dynamic research practices of “New Art history ". In this paper,one of the leading scholars in social history of art, Arnold Hauser, and his mostfamous works, one of art history milestones, Social History of Art, published in1951, is the entry point. I will analysis the sociological perspective, concepts andmethods that employed in art history, and combine this new approach withbroader background of the evolution of art historiography. On this basis, I willdiscuss in detail that in the middle of20century, a turning point in arthistoriography deeply impacted the discipline of itself. Four crucial categoriesconstitute the new topical subject in social history of art. Firstly, thesocio-economic structure and the social class stratification generate the action andreaction to the formation and evolution of art styles. Secondly, Hausercompromised Karl Marx and Gy rgy Lukács’s theory of ideology and utopia, andpointed out that the art works carry on various forms of ideology. He madeFrench artist Jacques-Louis David as a case study to answer that whether thepolitical nature of art will affect the artistic quality or not. Next, Hauser discussthe art production, a variety of art mediation, art public, and explore how thesocial material environment involved step by step in the arts spiritual space.Finally, Hauser re-evaluated the contribution of Mannerism, and presented it asone of the contributions of social art history to its subject. In order to overcomethe social reductionism brought on art history, Hauser restructure the sociology ofart, which had given modernity to his art historiography. He introduced thedialogue mode in art history, eliminated the disadvantages of sociology alienationand simplification all phenomena as his objects. Hauser’s "communication" modeachieved a potential capacity. Art works are not only self-disciplined visual forms, but also expression of some kind of worldview based on social background. Inthis sense, art implies a social cognitive function. For us now, Social History ofArt became a trigger point, which urge us to think about what kind of relationshipbetween art and sociality, aesthetics and freedom? The relation between art andsociety is not simply agreement or opposition, but unstable and fluctuating. Theirrelationship is in fact the essence of people, the connection between peoples,people and society, as well as different social groups. In this regard, what isimportant are not Hauser’s optimistic conclusions, but the questions he proposed.Those are still significant for nowadays. Finally, the paper mapping a broadcontour of the social history of art, the relationship between Hauser and the earlystage of social history of art, and the connection between Hauser and later “NewArt History”.