approvingly observed, the new seventh edition more closely reflects
“changes in scholarship that began to place art more solidly in a social
and political context... [using it] much more as a way to discuss race,
class, and gender.”^21
The College Art Association—the principal organization of art his-
torians (its members also include artists, curators, collectors, and art
teachers)—not surprisingly pursues a decidedly avant-garde agenda in
its approach to contemporary art history and criticism, setting the stan-
dards for instruction in art history at most academic institutions, as well
as influencing museum scholarship. In many respects it is comparable to
the ideologically driven Modern Language Association (MLA), the
chief professional organization of literary scholars. As noted by a dis-
gruntled former member of the MLA—who helped to found, two
decades ago, an alternative organization dedicated to traditional schol-
arship, the Association of Literary Scholars and Critics (ALSC):It was during the l980’s... that the Modern Language Association passion-
ately embraced the politics of race, class, and gender, and aggressively cham-
pioned wholesale revision of the canon, while at the same time drastically
reducing commitment to traditional scholarship and criticism. Discontent was
widespread, but isolated and unfocused. And dissent was becoming danger-
ous: dissenters were marginalized and in some cases disgraced.^22While continuing to eschew political issues, the organization now also
seeks to “explore the literary dimensions of other arts, including film,
drama, painting, and music.”
In 1997, a small band of intrepid art historians formed the
Association for Art History as an alternative to the radical College Art
Association, and issued this forthright statement of purpose:The Association [for Art History] seeks to provide regular occasions for
sharing insights derived from systematic study of... art... through dis-
cussion which is free of jargon, ephemeral ideology and doctrinal rigidity.... [B]y asserting the importance of the philological, humanistic, and
scholarly aspects of art history as a research discipline and by insisting upon
the centrality of the art object itself, the Association nurtures and sustains
the venerable but ever-maturing discipline of art history, while promoting
an intellectually coherent approach to the comprehension of the object, its
image and its meanings.^23
Sad to say, the association never progressed much beyond the early plan-
ning stages, although it managed to attract a few thousand members at172 Louis Torres