| In the early 20th century, Modern Art as a new approach to art flourished and had attracted the attention of curators and critics. "New ways of seeing" were experimented and enjoyed increasing public favor. More and more emerged the new art forms, modern standards and critics with "improper critique". These all became the major concerns of Gombrich since the 1940s. This paper will discuss the findings based on E.H Gombrich's last works "The Preference for the Primitive", using a methodology of a study to history. It is found that Gombrich hadn't changed his art history theory which he suggested "Making and Matching" as the art theory to develop art. Only those that conformed to this theory would be allowed to be noted, otherwise it would be targeted by "The Logic of Vanity Fair". However, his art history theory encountered difficulties when interpreting the modern art. In order to solve the problem, this paper will look into Gomrich's theory and critic with a new scientific view. By studying post Popper philosophy, we find that science hasn't been developing in a absolute rational way, instead, it's a result of an irrational "revolution". Therefore, in the art history, the modern art which has been regarded as "the logic of vanity fair" and opposed by many, now encompassed a revival. That said, one theory to explain many historical phenomenon will show its own limitation. From that point, Gomrich different from other historians, is more of an art criticist with intelligent insights. |
