Critique of aesthetic experientialism; surveys its origins in the formalism of Wölfflin, comments on its uniqueness in the context of modernism as a theory that sought to deny both historicity and its own status as theory, and discusses American formalism as a scientific discipline of the humanities. Draws attention to the numerous paradoxes surrounding the legitimacy of experience that experiential formalism outlines; and concludes that what was a strategic opening for Wölfflin became a dangerous historiographic void because the formalist-experientialist discourse disregarded the historical and theoretical bases of its own methodology and falsely legitimized itself in opposition to historicism, totalitarianism, and "dead" scholarship.
Sauf mention contraire ci-dessus, le contenu de cette notice bibliographique peut être utilisé dans le cadre d'une licence CC BY 4.0 / Unless otherwise stated above, the content of this bibliographic record may be used under a CC BY 4.0 license