Interart Analogy: Practice and Theory in Comparing the Arts

Some notions of artistic creativity amongst history of art students acquired through incidental learning

“…While some of these students clearly had views which related well to those of experts and artists, some also had simple misconceptions, as with those who found it difficult to see how a viewer is creative (cf Hirsch, 1967;Thomas, 1991). Others were probably more complex, as with those who showed no signs of seeing importance in Function in the product (cf Siegesmund, 1998).…”

“…When something has this rightness of fit, it is a surrogate for experience with the potential to communicate ideas, feelings and emotions perceived to be of value (Langer, 1976;Seefeldt, 1995). Creativity is not, of course, confined to the artist but extends to viewers who must construct personal meaning or significance from what they see in a work of art (Hirsch, 1967;Thomas, 1991).…”

Imitation, interaction and imagery: Learning to improvise drawing with music

“…In the Baroque period, for instance, painting was often compared to musical harmony by theorists in both fields to clarify notions of proportion and color (Spitzer, 2004: 137-206). In the historiography of the arts, interart analogies have traditionally focused on structural parallels in such largescale aspects as symmetry or balance of overall design (Stechow, 1953;Thomas, 1991). Artists themselves have likewise looked to other art forms for inspiration and influence as is clear, say, from the well-documented musical influences in twentieth-century modernist painting (Maur, 1999;Vergo, 2010).…”