Disegno' and the Signs of Artistic Creativity - Some Cultural–Historical Reflections on the Education of Artists in Europe

Aug 20, 2026

Upload by Quinn

The modern conception of art intensifies a dispositif that inaugurated contemporary ideas of the liberal arts, while maintaining strong continuity in how the “signs” of art are theorized. Art signs can be defined and assessed as iconography, but not through internal requirements for a creative work, leaving open how art signs and artistic qualification are constituted. Reflections shaped by 20th-century institutional experience trace creativity in art history through ambivalence, dogma, destroying, and unlearning.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages27

Reading Time1 h 8 min

AccessFree to download

Diversifying Assessments of Creativity and the Creative

Profanisation and Everyday Sacralisation of the Artist as Transgressor of Limits

`Disegno' and the Signs of Artistic Creativity Some Cultural–Historical Reﬂections on the Education of Artists in Europe Hans Ulrich Reck Kunsthochschule für Medien Köln abstract: The modern conception of art has radicalised the dispositif that originally initiated the contemporary understanding of the liberal arts, but has not substantially changed it. Unlike the pictorial and stylistic forms of painting, one ﬁnds that over the past 500 years there has been a high degree of continuity in the meta–theoretical conception of the `signs' of art: the signs of art can only be adequately deﬁned and evaluated as iconography, but not with regard to any internal requirements for a creative work. Thus the question remains as to how the signs of art and the qualiﬁcation as art are constituted. In the light of 20th century experience, the following reﬂections on an art history of creativity shaped by institutions explore core relationships and links ﬂagged by the keywords ambivalence, dogma, destroying, and unlearning. keywords: Creativity, ﬁne arts, intentionality, academy, semiotics. 1. DiVering Assessments of Creativity and the Creative: Profanisation and Everyday Sacralisation of the Artist as Transgressor of Limits According to leading design theorists, founders of academies, educators, and `programmatists'—from Federico Zuccari to the Bauhaus and the Ulm School of Design—the fundamental essence of art does not change; it is hermetic, unfathomable, and unknowable as a matter of principle. The signs and indications of art and the qualiﬁcation as art are held to be ambivalent. This has two sides—a public and an internal one. The internal side is that even without meta–linguistic verbalisation or substantiation, any connoisseur is capable of recognising the signs of qualiﬁcation as art, including gradations, graduations, and foundations, which is what makes him or hera connoisseur. The other, public side stands fast by its opinion, ﬁrmly and ostensibly unswervingly, that no theory exists for this, no doctrine, nothing overarching, and there is scant evidence for any generalisation heuristics or at least none that could enable an inductive determination. 48 Hans Ulrich Reck In line with this is the genealogy of the concept of the academy, which has exerted such inﬂuence on the modern era, the outlines of which were laid down by the ﬁrst major institutions of this type: the Accademia del Disegno established 1563 in Florence by Giorgio Vasari, and the Compagnia di San Luca artists' guild in Rome that Federico Zuccari reorganised into an art academy in 1593, the Accademia di San Luca. In the beginning formulas and concerns were surprisingly simple. The eVective reduction of the debate about art that has taken place since then, in which there has been a partitioning–oV of the precepts of connoisseurship from, by contrast, a proliferating discourse about the aesthetics of art and the rhetoric of its works against the outside, is only comprehensible if one considers the entire context in all its facets. Vasari's sole concern was to advance the appreciation and recognition of artists in a public sphere that had changed while at the same time preserving the artists' obligation to a relatively limited circle of powerful people and an elite that commissioned artworks. Put diVerently, Vasari sought the emotive participation of the public in an altered concept that was never properly brought to their conscious attention. This had an enduring impact on the image of the artist as well as on the artist's role, but particularly on the `new' claim, justiﬁed on the grounds of innovation or acceleration, to a changed and expanded range of action within society. Function, design, characteristics, and casting of the artist's role were redeﬁned and established for the ultimate purpose of upwardly re–evaluating the artist, who then became eVectively disengaged from artisanry. The public role of the artist autonomised art, although half of the

FAQs

Why does the article distinguish between defining art signs as iconography and internal requirements for creativity?

It argues that art signs can be adequately defined and evaluated as iconography, whereas internal requirements for a creative work cannot provide the same basis for definition and evaluation.

What is the role of ambivalence in the qualification of art as discussed in the text?

The signs and indications of art are described as ambivalent, with both public and internal sides shaping how art is recognized and how theories are framed in institutions.

How does the genealogy of the academy relate to the education and social position of artists?

The text links early institutions to a redefinition of the artist’s public role, training, and status, including mechanisms that autonomise art and tie changes to clearer or more dogmatic definitions laid down by academies.

Aug 20, 2026

Upload by Quinn