Should sight trump the other four senses when experiencing and evaluating art? Art, History and the 1830 to the Present questions whether the authority of the visual in 'visual culture' should be deconstructed, and focuses on the roles of touch, taste, smell, and sound in the materiality of works of art. From the nineteenth century onward, notions of synaesthesia and the multi-sensorial were important to a series of art movements from Symbolism to Futurism and Installations. The essays in this collection evaluate works of art at specific moments in their history, and consider how senses other than the visual have (or have not) affected the works' meaning. The result is a re-evaluation of sensory knowledge and experience in the arts, encouraging a new level of engagement with ideas of style and form.
In the introduction to their book, editors Patrizia di Bello and Gabriel Koureas address the criticism that art history has traditionally privileged the visual sense as a means of understanding and interpreting art. They argue that in order to fully understand the experience of viewing art, it is necessary to consider the role of all the senses and the bodily experience in the visual arts. The editors emphasize the importance of recognizing the subjectivity and social construction of the senses, and argue that art history should consider not only the “period eye,” but also the “period sensorium.” The book presents several studies that explore the relationship between art history and the senses, with the goal of reinterpreting visual works through a sensory perspective. While acknowledging the role of the artist in mediating the senses according to cultural codes, the editors may slightly downplay the importance of reason and science in the creation and interpretation of art.