/ Art History & Association of Art Historians 2009. ISSN 0141–
6790. Vol
32. No
4. September 2009. Pp 755-
784. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. В статье приведена интересная схема формирования и развития социологических идей, относящихся к сфере культуры и искусства, среди членов "Воскресного кружка". Основные персоналии - Карл Мангейм и Алоиз Ригль, статья посвящена главным образом изложению и сравнению их точек зрения на проблематику социологии культуры. Citation: "Mannheim offers theoretical tools for a much more systematic analysis of the way
in which both larger social structures and the social organization of cultural production may shape the character of cultural artefacts, whether political ideologies or artistic styles. Art historians, like Baxandall, have long been aware of the relevance of such factors to the understanding of art, but treat them merely as ‘background’, unwilling to incorporate them systematically into their analysis. In part this hesitation is a function of the often reductive character of sociologists’ explanations of art".
6790. Vol
32. No
4. September 2009. Pp 755-
784. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. В статье приведена интересная схема формирования и развития социологических идей, относящихся к сфере культуры и искусства, среди членов "Воскресного кружка". Основные персоналии - Карл Мангейм и Алоиз Ригль, статья посвящена главным образом изложению и сравнению их точек зрения на проблематику социологии культуры. Citation: "Mannheim offers theoretical tools for a much more systematic analysis of the way
in which both larger social structures and the social organization of cultural production may shape the character of cultural artefacts, whether political ideologies or artistic styles. Art historians, like Baxandall, have long been aware of the relevance of such factors to the understanding of art, but treat them merely as ‘background’, unwilling to incorporate them systematically into their analysis. In part this hesitation is a function of the often reductive character of sociologists’ explanations of art".