NationalStereotypes,Prejudice,
and AestheticJudgments
.rt and the Humanities,
in lconologlt Humanistic
),rye4off.
3ook, r968). Originally
V i s u a lA r t s , " z o ) , " i t i s
so many humar.rpossi-
: e c a u s eo f o u r h i s r o r i e s
r knowledgc of history
ichu 26,no. z (1998).
6-57. In this regard see
a Philosophica/ Cou tt'xt,
i;2r9-2.o.
;ein our contemporarv
h: Fink, r994); L)icrer
flexion (Munich: Fink,
>oo):T j7.
))i Dz-4ot.
in the Historiography
of Art
Thontos
DoCastoKoufnrcnn
Vhen I wasa qr:rduatestuderlt,an importanr professor,
rvho laterbecar.nc
rhe chief
cul'rltorof a major museumwherc I wasonce alsoa fellow,usedto dismissafr fronr
Austria and surrounding regio's as "schnitzcl"and arr f}om Germany as "kraut."
Sootr afterward,wl'ren I began teachir.rg,
a senior professorand chair of rhe de-
partmetrtwhcrc I tcachspokc in a similar vcin aboucmy inrcrestin art ficlrn these
rcgi<lns.He said rhat I would not havewrittcr.ron a major artist by the tinre I was
fbrry, because,as he obvior-rsly
inrplicd, rherewas no major arr in ccnrral Europe.
No doubt ntany art historianswho havestr-rdiedprcviouslyneglectecl areas
may havc had sinrilar expcrierrces.
As ma.nyrecentcritiquesof arr hisrory and of
othcr fieldshave argr.red,
callonsare establishccl,
parametersor paradignrschosen
f o r c l i s c u s s i o no f a t i m e p e r i o d o r p l a c e t h a t n . r a yd e p e n d o n a s s u n r p r i o l l so r
d e t e r r l i n a t i o n s t h a t i g u o r e c l r t l i s m i s st h e a r t a n d c u l t u r e o f o t h c r p l a c c so r
peoplesasultworthy of attention,sccond-mtc,or derivative.'l'hc terms"scfipitzcl"
a n d " k r a u t " n t o r e o v e ri n d i c a t e t h a t s t a n d a r d so f t a s t c m : r y l i n k a e s t h e t i ca r r d
historicaljudgments with national stcreotypesand prejudices.This definition of
llational stcreotyPes
fbllows recent researchin describingsteleorypesas rrore or
lcssgeneralreprescntations
of socialphenor.nena,
which arealwaysconnecredwith
vah-re.iudgmenrs.Srereorypes are judgments connecredwirh convictionsthat are
i n d e p e n d e ' t o f a c t u a l e x p e r i e n c e ;t h e y a r e t r a n s m i t t e d a n d m e d i a t e d f r o m
traditions,in this ir-rsrance
inrellectualones,anclhistoriography.r
In any insrance,epirhetsfor peoplesof nationsorher than one'.s own have
long associatedcultural differencewith eating habits. one speaksdisparaginglyin
French of the English as "les rosbeef,"in English of the Frenchas "frogs,"and of
the Germansas "krauts." Bur one may well recallvoltairet commenrsabout rhe
"cornmon saying, that there is r-rodisputing
about rasres:. . . if by tastehere be un-
derstood the palate,which loathescerrain aliments and relishesorhers, the ma-rim
is just; [becauseit is needlessto dispute about what cannor be corrected,or to
attempt reforming the constitution of organs nrelely corporeall. But rhe maxim is
firlseand pernicious, when applied to thar intellectual tasre,which has frorits
objectsthe arts and sciences."2Or asDavid Hume pur ir in his essay"of the Standard
of Thste," "we are apt to call barbflrouswhateverdepartswidely from our own rasre
77 ThomasDaCostaKaufmann

and apprehension:But soon find the epithct o[reproach retortedon us."] esta
Personalanecdotescan thus serveto introduce a more generaland long- belie
standinsproblenr in the literatureof art. This brief papertakesup this themc and is no
c o n s i d e r s ,f i r s t , o n e i m p o r t a n t t r : r d i t i o n o f a r t h i s t o r y t h a t t r i e d t o b e f r e e o f
aestheticprejudices.Second,it suggests
how this tr:rdition may havebeeninitiated Gom
as a responscto the employment of canonsin art history, bLrt that art historians coulc
associatedwith this school also failcd to escapefi'om the snaresof regional and in ke
natiolralprcjudices,and thar thc tenacitl,of rhcscprejudicesrcsult.sonly in part o u rd
fronr the circumst:rnccthat the c'lisciplincrvasfilrn-redand grew during an ageof made
trationalism.Finally,irn arqllmellt is rnrrdethat a more firndementalproblem is in- diseg
volved,one that haspersistedflom the tinre that aesthetics
first becameentanglcd ing tc
with art historyand a kind of proto-anthropology,."vhen
thc moclcrnforrnsof these in fa'
discoursesin firct origin:rtcdin the cightccnth centLlry. negle
A rcmark attributed to thc Vicnncsc rrrr histolian Alois Riegl providesa This
go<rdcntry irrto thi.sProblcmkreis.
Ricgl i.srcputcti to havc said that thc best ar-t for cr
h i s t o r i a nw a st h c o n c w i t h o u t p e r s o t r at a
l s t c .B r . t h i sh e m c a n tt h a t o n c h a c lt o s h e c l inclu
one'saestheticprejuclicesirucltry to cliscovcrthc historical raisor.rcl'6treof every
work of the past.l In this eflbrt Ricgl was rcsproncling
ro a kind of art history rep- sequ
rcsentedby his only slightlyyoungercontcmporary,JuliLrsvon Schlosser.s Schlosser Cerrr
betwecna history of alt and a histoly of grcat rrrtists,which stood
distir-rgtrished for w
of it, sincc he bclievcciin atr indcl-rctrclcnt
or-rtsidc clnorr of greatartist.s.
Schlo.s.scr histor
alsobelicvedin natiorralstcre()t),pes. \Wrrndclk:rmmcrn
ln l.risbook on tlre Kunst- ar.rcl V/inc
of thc Renaissru)cc,
Schkrssclspcaksof nrrtionalpcctrliariticsand prcjtrclices,
and whicl
contraststhe collcctionsof the ltalians,who areso laticlnalthat rnathematicsmight proce
almost be consicleredthcir clialect.with thc adventurousilrational collectionsof assun
t h e G e r u a n s ,w h o s t i l l b r e a t h e ct l r ea i r o f t h e s u p e r s t i t i o nosf t h c M i d d l c A g e si u Winc
c h e i rK u n s t - a n d W u n d c r k a n r n r c r n .Fr 'o r S c h l o s s ear ,n d s i m i l a r l yc i t h c r i m p l i c i t l y subse
o r e x p l i c i t l vf b r r n a n ya r t h i s t o r i a r r - s . s i nt chc e i g h t e e n t hc e n t u r y ,t h e c a n o n a n c i be pc
the norm wcre firmishednot only by classicalantiquity,but by thc Italian national givinl
creatior-r,
Renaissance
art. exPre
What Riegl was rcacting to w.rs however assuredlynot just an attitude institr
expresscdby his corrtenrporaries.
In a fhrniliar criticluefirst delivcled as a lecture of Ge
lorty ycars ago, h,. H. Cionrbrich,who rvasalso a studcnt oF.Scl.rlosscr, demcln- the fc
stratedthat fi'om :rt least(iiorgio Vasari,art history lra.sutilized processe.s
of sq,li.stic
classificatior.r
and critical charactcriz:rtion
that dcpend upon the establishmentof cially
norms that in turn excludefrrrms that clo not conform to the canon they Riegl
 Prejudice,
Stereotypes, andAesthetic
Judgmentsl3

'ted on us."3
To exemplify his argument, (lombrich-who,
establish.T it may also be noted,
re generaland long- believedin trtrnshistoricalstar.rclarcl.
and norms-adduced Vasari'.s
remarkson what
s up this theme and is now calledGothic architecture.
: tried to be free of Br-rtVasari did not Llscthe word "(lothic." In the well-known passage
. havebeen initiated Gombrich cited, Vasarispokeof "anotherkind of work, calledGerman . . . which
t that art historians could well be calledConfusion or f)isorder instead."8Vasari'snegativercmarksare
tresof regional and in kcepingwith thc kinds of categories
that he establishedand employedthrough-
resultsonly in part out the Vite.As is well knowrr,Vasaridcploycddistirrctionsamong the typesof art
:w during an age of made in variouscities,betweenart in Florenceand art in Venice,berween'lirscan
entalproblem is in- disegnoand Venctiartcolorito.He alsoim;rlicd that artistscould be treatedaccord-
t becameentangled r.rotonly clcarlyrcsultedfrom a prejudice
ing to national difllrenccs.Vasari's1-rositior.r
rdernforms of these i n f a v o r o f t h e ' I u s c a n ( a n d i t s r c l a t e cal p p e a r a n c eisn R o m e ) , b u t i t l e d t o t h e
of othcr ccntcrs,and clcarlyof the art of other natiotrs.')
neglector dis;raragcn-rcr.rt
ris Riegl provides a This is fbr instancealso evident inhis uita oFJacol'ro Pontormo, whcrc one point
.id that the best arr f b r c r i t i c i s m i s P o n t o r m o ' su s c o f ( l e r m a n e n g r a v i n g s n
: o r t h e r n e r s ,G e r m a n s
hat one had to shed l0
inclLrdcd,arc to come to Italy to le:rrnfrom Italian art, not the reverse.
ison d'!tre of every of aestheticjudgment haveir.rfbrmcdr.r.ruch
Sirnilarexpressiorrs of the sub-
I of art history rep- sequcntlitcraturc of art. l)epenclingon one'spoint of view, the Venetian,Dutch,
lchlosser.5
Schlosser Clerman,French, or whatevcrplaccorrc might like to promote, suppliedthe norm
rrdsts,which stood for writers who respondeclto Vasari in creating their owr.rregior.ral
or national
:at artists.Schlosser Eventhe sort of art historywhich, likc the work ofJohannJoachim
historiographies.
dtVunderkammern 'Winckelmann,
trcatcclnational or local schocllsas constituting a sequence,and
nd prejudices,and which in the writings of later historiansregarcledthis seclue
nce as the resultof a
mathematicsmight processof evoh-rtionoltstyles,managedto cornbine this icleaof progresswith the
ional collectionsof a s s u m p t i o n t h a t s o m e n o r m h a d b e e n e x p r e s s e di n t h e h i s t o r y o f a r t . F o r
the Middle Ages in 'Winckelmann,
and for n.rarry others,it wasof coursethe art of ancientGreece,and
rly either implicidy subsequentlythat of the Italian Renaissance.llTbbe sure,other norms could also
ury, the canon and b e p o s i t e d :J o h a n n W o l f g a n g v o n ( l o e t h e t h u s t u r n e d V a s a r io n h i s h e a d b y
the Italian national g i v i n ga p o s i t i v ev a l u et o G o r h i ca r c h i t c c r u racn d d e e m i n gt h e ( l o t h i c a p o s i t i v c
expressionof Clermanness. lr Subsequently,many art historiansfrom the time of the
Lotjust an attirude institutionalization of the discipline in the nineteenth century havesung the praises
:liveredas a lecture of German art; mutatis mutandisart of other nations hasalso been celebratedwhen
Schlosser,
demon- the forms of their art were establishedas normative.
)rocesses
ofstylistic Normative assumptions and in particular the classicalcanon were espe-
te establishmentof cially what Riegl had in his sights.As Otto Pdcht suggestedin his acute analysisof
o the canon they Riegl, the implications of Riegl's writings were that the classicalcanon, and
74 ThomasDaCostaKaufmann

absoluteaestheticnorms in get-reral,
had becomc obsoletebv the late nineteenth write
T'hey had to be dropped. Instead,it was necessary
centut'y.1r to r-rnderstand
that and I
eachphasein history had its owrl aesthcticideals.For rhis, as is rvellknown, Riegl to hir
developeclthe iclcaof Kunstu,ollen:each period and placehad its own Kunstwollen. ideas
Neverthelcss, judgmentsand an approachto history that
while eschewir.rg tiona
seemedto be basedo11aestheticplejudices,Ricgl ernployeclconccptsof regional impo
or national constautsthat also rely on stereotypes,
and n.ra.y
insinuatesuch preju- theV
clicesir-rtothc writing of history. In Dts Hol/andischeGruppenportrlr Riegl called to Ot
t h e l ) u t c h g r o L r pp o r t f a i t " t h e g en r e r r l o s rr e p r c s e n r a t i voef H o l l a n d \ r . r a r i o r . r a l to Kc
stvle."raWhatever
the term may nreanclsewhcre,I{icgl'sproteanKunstwollenisthe
force which drives stylistic changc in Das HollAndiscbeGruppenportzTl.lr takcs on Pdch
n a t i o r l a l:,r n c l v i t h i n r h c n e t i o n a l ,r c g i o n a lf i r r n r si n t h c g e n r co f p o r t r l i r u r c . amou
AlthoLrghit nright bc argued rhx Kunsht,o//cn
is tr I'reuristicanclnot nec- ing a
cssarilya psycho[ogicaltcrn'r, Itiegl's use of thc conccl-ltof Kurtstutollezz
in this and tl
particular c:rsei.sclircctly uscclt<l cxplain nati()n1rlancl Ioc:rlstylesin relation to fashi
g r o t r p p s y c h o l o g y .W h a t W o l f g a n g K c n r ; r h a s c a l l e d a n " e t h n o p s y c h o l o g i c a l tion t,
construrt,"riner.nclythc cheractcrof Holland or of thc north, as opposcdto ltaly, the in
is u.sedto lrccountfor thc clcvcloPtnentof ,t Phcnorncnonin thc historl,of alt. ln sities
this way Ricgl'sthinking itr tcrms of sti'rcotypeswas not so frrrrenrovedfiom that of Rie
o f S c h l o s s c rM
. a t c r i a l w h i c h d o c s n o t c l u i t c f i t R i c g l ' sd e f i n i t i o n s o r . r ec o u l d intrin
addLrcccoulrtcrexamples-i.s .sinrply rrot considcrcd. Picht
F u r t h c r m o r c , R i e g l ' sI r o t i o l r so f n a t i o n a l c l i l t f e r c n c easn d o f h i s t o r i c a l what r
cvolution rvcreclcerly Lrascc{ or-rcertein rncial rrssrrnrlrtiorrs, trrnrrrrorrro his cimc, as the
-l'hcse
i n w h i c h t l r e n a t i o t r . so f l ' . r r r o 1 .cr cn r l ' t o c l .l ya c i a l d i f f c l c n c e s . i c l e a sr v e r e chara
explicitly cxprcssedin Riegl'snrlntrscril-rtof r89719llfbr a bool<on thc Historische as wal
Orantntotik der bi/rlendcnKiiilstt', especiallyin Passrrges wherc Riesl de,rlswirh the notor
"gernt,tttischc
Vilkt'r." lliegl rlean,sherc rrot only the pcoplc.sof thc time of the gtear alist a
migrations,but evcn l:rtcr(lermans, llrench, ancl Nethcrlandcrs,who are consid- some
cred to bc"Viilkcrrt der gcrrntnist:lterRrtsse."
Riegl acc<lunts,frrr cxample, fbr the as Da
diflerencebctweenllrench and Clermanart in thc twelfth century by ref'ercnce
to
in blood, meaning, in tl.rclanguageof this discourse,race.Racefor
cliflercr.rces malig
Riegl remainsthc constantin thc histoly ctf,rrt'.Oerm,tnenarethe group that Riegl movel
lef-ers
to in the evcrrlaterper-iocls
of thc Renaissancc
rucl barotlue,in which it might reentl
h a v c b e e n e x p e c t e d c, v e n i r c c o r d i n gt o R i e g l ' so w n t r e n d o f t h i n k i n e , t h a t t h e than r
uiilkischor racial characterwould havc been elfectively diluted. I(' Vienr
Thinking in terms of rlcial or national constantswrls common to many preju<
 Stereotypes,
Prejudice,
andAesthetic
Judgmentsl5

the late nineteenth writers of Riegl'stimc (he dieclin r9o5),as it had becn in the ninetecnrhcenrury,
to understandthat and his assumptionsabotrtthc psychologyof pcopleswere certainlynot restrictcd
; well known, Riegl to his time and pl:rce. I{icgl is, howevcr,im;rorranrfbr scveralreasons.For Rieglt
'.sown Kunstwollen.
ideash:rvecontinucd to providc the basisfbr argurnentsfor thc existenceof na-
cachto history that tional anclrncialconstantsin art. Notions of natior.r:rl
or racialconstantsremained
onceptsof regional important during thc twcntieth century for mru'ryVicnr.rese profbssors
through all
sinuatesuch preju- the Vienlra"schools"oFart history,fronr the "first school,"to which Rieglbelongcd;
portrlit Riegl called to Otto l)iicl.rt,Hans Sccll-nayr,
anclKarl Maria von Swobodain the secondschool;
Holland'snational t o K o u r a c lO b c r h u b c ri n m o s t r c c c n tr i m c s . l :
r Kunstwollenis the RccentlyI{icgl anclother scholar-s
associatecl
with the Vienna Schoollike
tportrtit. It takes on P:icht havebccn tratrslatccl
into Irnglish;thcy havebcgur.rto receiverrn increasing
of portraiture. amount of attcntiorr,in prrrt pcrh:rpsbecauscthcy may seemto ofler a way of do-
rristicand not nec- ing art history which appcarst() cscapefnrr.nsome traditionalacstheticprejudices,
(unstwollenin this a n d t h u s t o g i v e l i c c n s ct o a n c x p a n s i o no f t h e c a n o n . r sW h i l e i t h a sa l s ob e c o m e
tylesin relation to fashionablcto stressothcr aspccrsof rhinking about psychologyand style ir.rrela-
hnopsychological tion to art to bc fbund in thc work of Rieglancll):icht,and to clvcrlookor downplay
ts opposedto Italy, the irnportanceof thcir:rssLulptior)s
about the naturcanclefFectof r.rational
propcn-
Lehistory of art. L.r sities,assumptic'rtrs
about nationalconstnlltsncvcrthelcss
constitlrtethe fbunclation
removedfrom that of l{icgl's(and fbllowing hirn, of l'richr'sand Swoboda's)argumenrsabourwhat is
tions-one could intrinsic ro "thc instirrctualanclsupra-ilrdividualnatLlreof thc cvolurionof art."l')
I'richt's(and other Vicnnesescholars')precognitior.r
of sryles,that is their use of
; andof historical what more nelrtrally,inclccdpositively,hasbeen clescribcdby Hans-GeorgGadamer
nmon to his time, as the employment of herrncncuticprejudicc,loin accountingfor the origin and
Theseideaswere characterof clifl-erent
forrnsof art rclicsexplicitlyor-rthe ideaof r-rational
constanrs,
on the Historische as was alreadycriticized in a rrcnchant revicw of r936 by Mcyer Schapiro.Most
jegl dealswith the notol'iously,these:rssttt-t.t1-rtions
are hard to distinguishfrom other sortsoFnation-
le time of the great alist ar-rdcven racial prejudices,and rhey had consequences
fbr the opinions of
s, who areconsid- some of thosc trained in Vie nr-raincluding art historianswho becameNazis,such
r example,for the as Dagobert Frey arrd Hans Sedln.rayr.rl
'l'he
rry by referenceto p o i n r i s n e i t h e r r o c a s r i g a r cs c h o l a r so f t h e V i e n n a S c h o o l n o r r o
fse,race.Race for malign them all fbr the associationof some art historianswith unsavorypolitical
-I'hinking
regroup that Riegl movements. in rerms of national srereorypes pervadedso much nine-
, in which it might teenth- and rwentieth-century thinking about art that it would require much more
:hinking, that the than one paper to addressit adequately.Neverthelessthe caseof Riegl and his
t6
Viennesesuccessors
is instructive, becauseit suggeststhat even where aesthetic
common to many prejudiceof one sorr may seemro be absenr,thinking in terms of stereorypes,
and
76 ThomasDaCostaKaufmann

thus having recourseto other sortsof prejudice,not just of a neutral hermeneutic and ta
kind, may determinethe shapeof argumentsabout history and aesthetics. states
Furthermot'e,althoughdiscussionof dre "instinctualnatureof artisticevo- scarce
lution" is :r post-Enlightenn.rent
phenomenon,questionsraisedin relation to the emine
writings of Riegl and thc Vienna School lead to considerationof an issuethat is could
alreadypreselrtin the eighteenthcentrlr\,,when the modern discourseso[art his- nal dis
tory and acstheticswcre founded. Some of the first works of the eighteenthcentury, debilit
l i k e t h a t o f t h e A b b d c l u B o s , w h i c h m a r k e d o u t a s p a c ef o r t h e a e s t h c r i ci n inhabi
relatior.r
to works of what came to bc calledthc visr-ral
arts,by defining a separate raciald
realmo[finc arts,relicd ou the rclation of tasteand its expressionirr artisticprod-
ucts to nation, conccivedas an underlying construrt.Like thc better-knownwork aesthe
o f M o n t e s q u i e u ,A b b d d u B o s el a b o r a t e col l c l e rc l i m a t o l o g i c a ln o t i o n s o l t t h e Kant. I
origins of nationalcharacrer.[)u B<lsrclatedart to nationalcharacter,and charirc- them t
ter in turrr tcr air alrcl clirnirte. lnhis Rifexions critiquessur la poisit et la peinture, typing
du IJosassertcd,
fbr example,that thc warmth of the Englishclirnatcwas suflicient
to producegreatexemplarsof most of thc scicnces
and professions,
exceptfbr p:rint- older d
i n g a n d t h e r e l a t c cvl i s u , r [a r t s . E n g l i s h p a i n t i n g c o t r l d b c r e p r e s e n t c db y t h r e c in the ,
obscureportreitists;n.rostof the visualartistsactivein L,nglandrverefrlreignborn.2l geogra
In his essayon national characters,l)avid HLrmcsubjectcdto i] stringent Anthrol
c r i t i q u e t h e a r g u r n e t r t so f d u B o s a n c l o t h e r sw h o w c l u l c la s s i g nt h e o r i g i n s o f tions or
rratioualchrrracterto physicll c'.ruses.
Howcver, Hunrc not only rctainecldu Bos's thar is 1
sortsoltdistinctior.rs
of nrrtionalcharacter,[rut also his distinctivetermir.rologyof to nati(
moral and physicalcauses.Humc rejecreciphysicalc:ruscsin favor of "moral" crruses derived
Forr.ration:rl by phvsicalnrcaning"thosc<1tr:rlitics
ch:rracters, of the air and climate," Stamm
just thosethingsthat du Bos and N4ontcsclr-rieu
hacldiscussed.In stressir.rg
the moral nationa
he meant "all circumstanccswhich arc {itted to work on thc mind as morivesor of earlie
reasonsthe nature of thc govenrmcnt,the revolutirlnsclf pubic affairs,the plenty
or penury in rvhich the peoplc livc, the sittrationof thc nation witl'r reqardto its of his "p
neighboLrls,
and such like circumstances."li critical
Although Hume thus seemedto lavor what might be calledhistorical,em- remaine
piricalgrounds for the existenceof narionalcharacter,he undercut his arguments content
by making assumptionsribout thc natural rrptitudeud qualitv of men, rvhich can when h
only be thought of as physical,as constant,and indced as raciallydetermined.In observe
his essayon national character,as in that on taste,Hume might haveseemedtcl al- not shifi
low for suprahistorical
standards,and fbr cultural cre:rtionsthat rvereindependent
of peoples.Yet Hume specificallyexcludedAfricans from the categoriesof culture lime, Ka
 Stereotypes,
Prejudice,
andAestheticJudgments 77

eutral hermeneutic and tastc,irnclfor rcasonsthat can be said to be derived fiom physicalcauses.Hume
d aesthetics. states:"l am apt to suspectthe nesroesto Lrenaturallyinf-eriorto the whites.There
rtureofartistic evo- scarcelyeverwas a civilizecln:rtion of that complcxior-r,nor even any individual
d in relation to the eminent either in action or speculation.Such a uniform and constantdifference
r of an issuethat is could r.rothappcrr,in so many countriesand ages,if naturehad not made an origi-
of art his-
iscourses nal distinction betweenthcsebrceclsof mcn."la BccauscHumc suggests that these
eighteenthcentury, dcbilitiesof what he calls"negroes"
arerevealedno m:rtterwhat societyor land they
rr the aestheticin inhabit, they must be regardedas innate qualities,what c:rnbe calledthe resultsof
defining a separate racialdiflcrcnccs.Conscclllcntlythcrc hasbccrrnrr-rchdiscussior.rof Htrmet racism.rs
'fhcse
on in artisticprod- icleas,atrclin efl-ecta rangcof similar stercotypcdnotior.rs
haunt the
retter-knownwork :resthetic:rlrd, perhapsnrore surprisingly,the cpistcn.rological
idcasof Immanuel
cal notions of the Kant. lt is wcll known that Kant rcsponcledto Hunre'saesthetictheories.Through
rracter,and charac- ther.nhe lil<cwisebcc:rnrcensnarcclin the problemsof natiotral:rnd racialstereo-
>oy'sie
et la peinture, typing that wcre prcsentin Hun-rc.
matewassulicient Kant'sacstheticswcrc intertwined with his anthropololy, which while an
1s,exceptfor paint- olclcr cliscourscwrrsncwly clcfineclas a scparatesubject or "science"(Wissenschaft)
by three
presented i n t h c c i g h t e c n t hc e n t u r y . l (F
' o r K a r r t a n t h r o p o l o g ya l s o f o r m e d t o g e t h e rw i t h
vereforeignborn.22 g c o g r a p h yt h c w h o l e o f o u r e m p i r i c a l k n o w l e d g eo f t h e w o r l d . 2 7W h e n i n h i s
:ctedto a stringcr.rt Anthropo/ogiein pragtnatisclterHinsichr of thc latc r79os, Kant turns fiom reflec-
rign the origins of tiorrs on man ir.rgcrrcralto cor.rsidcrin its discussionof Der CbarabterdesVolhes,
y retaineddu Bos's that is groupingsof men takcn in particul:rr,hc makcsdiflbrentiations according
.iveterminology of t o n a t i o n a l c l i s t i n c t i o n s . T h e V o / hi s t r e a t e ds y n o n y m o u s l yw i t h N a t i o n , a n d
rr of "moral" causes dcrivcd, cspcciallyas seenin his accotrntof the English, from its origins in the
heair and climate," S t a m m o r t r i b e . K a n t ' s a c c o u l l t o f n a t i o r - r acl h a r a c t c rp r o c e e d sb y d e s c r i b i n g
the moral
stressing national stcrcotypcsof thc Er.rropean
countries,which echo those of Hume, and
nind as motives or of earliereighteenth-centurythinkerssuch as du Bos.
: affairs,the plenty AlthoLrgh Kanr's Anthropologiein pragmatischerHinsicht may be called one
r with regardto its of his "post-critical"works becauseit appearedsubsequentto his threecritiquesof
critical reason,of practical reason,ancl of judgment, his opinions seem to have
rlledhistorical,em- ren.rained
fairly corrstant;Kant lecturedon anthropologyfrom the r77os,and the
rrcuthis arguments content of his lecturesprobably constitutedthe sourcefrom which he later drew
of men, which can w h e r - rh e p u t h i s t h o u g h t s d o w n i n p r i n t . I n a n y e v e n t i t h a s b e e n c o r r e c t l y
rlly determined.In observedthat Kant's judgments about national characterand its relation to art did
haveseemedto al- not shift from his pre-criticalto his post-criticalpublications.28
r wereindependent In a footnote to his remarks on the feeling of the beautiful and the sub-
ategories
of culture lime, Kant statesthat he is not investigating whether or not national differences
7B ThomasDaCosta
Kaufmann

appear by chance, or are bound rvith a cerrain necessityto clin-rate("ob diese

Nationalunterschiede
zufhllie . . . oder nrit eirrcrgewissenNotwendigkeit an das thinkir
Clima gebunclensevr-r").:'r
Readinc these remarks,which wele published ir-rthe ogy Ka
r76os,ir.rthe light of his ar"rteccdenr
comrnentsof ry57on physicalgeography, how- srefeo
evet',allowsfbr thc hypothesisthat he belicvecl,likc nranyother thinkersincluding ofart a
du Ros,that thesediflbrencesn.rayhavc depenclcdon climate. Kanr alsc'r
made state- alread
ments deme:rrringNegroes in his Beobdchtungentiber das GeJi.ihldesSchiinenund on dist
Er/tabenencllrthel7(rosthat firllorv thoseof Hurnc, whom he citcs,and pressfor was to
the idea of racialconst:lr.rrs.r') displa
Thc Kritik der reiuen V'crnunfi also bricfly brings up rhe issue of conclu
V o l k s c / t a r a h t rIrn. h i s t l i s c u s s i o no f t h c r e g u l a t i v eu s e o f i c i c a sK a n r m e n r i o n s art. Ca!
Volltscharahtcr
as a possiblcrcasot.tfbr thc clif'ferorces
of opinion that insightful and th
men may havc. Eithcr peo;rlc sce clif-fcrenccs
as clcrivine from Volkschtrakter, beauti
decisivcand inheriteclclistinctionsof firnrilies,rnclraccs,or all differences
are merely
t h e l c s t r l to f c h a n c c . cultura
Iu Kant'sopinion both sidcsin thc argtrnrcntoverlook the clccpercauses, conjoin
a n t l v i e r v so f t h c L r n i t yo r n r r - r l t i p I i c i toyf n a t u r c n r a y b c r e c o r . r c i l ebcyl r e a s o n . . j r Johann
K r r n tm a y t h u s w i t h c q L r a n i m i r n
y r c r c l yb c r c P r e s c r . r t i tnhec u n r e s o l v e do 1 - r i n i o n s \Winck
o f o t h e r s ,a n c lt r y i n g t o c x p l a i nd i f l c r e n c c si n a n r a n n e rw h i c h w o u l c lu o t b e c o n - effect o:
tingent or historical,mtrch in thc nrrrnncrof his ar-rthropology.
C)n rhe orhcr har.rcl, develo
f):rgobcrtFrc;',rvho wn.\,:rsnrcntionccl,a rwcntieth-ccr)ruryproponcnr of a raci.sr factors
geographyanil history of rrrt, maclcrcfi'rcncero this passage
and readpart of it to explicir
bolsterlris own llrslrmcnrsrhtr Vtlhscltardkterht(la racialbasis.r: by whi<
W h c t h c r i t t h e r c f o r c i s t h c c a s ct h a t r r r c i . sitd c a . sa b o u t r h e r r a t u r co f
ltationalcharncterarcalsoalreacly
ar)ticipetcdin this passaec
by Kant-gvcn rhough as caus
Kant characteristically
calls fbr reasonto adjrrclicare
ancl recor.rcile
diffcrenccsof of Etrur
opinion-Kant'.s atithrofrologydic{ r'clvorr gcneralizations
about nationalcharac- recent I
tcr, aucl Kant did nrakc assrtnrptionsabout racial diflirence. Racewas a subiecr differen
that cngageclKant ir.rother wrirings: l'reclcvoreda work spccificalll,to thc topic of the air:
racialdiflLrcrlces.
" He scctnsto havc lrclieved,in contrrrstrvith his pupil J<lhann have be
G o t t f r i e c lH e r d c r , t h a t t h e r e w c r e d i f f c r e n t r i l c c s ,s i g n i f i e db y c o l o r a n d o t h e r encesol
featurcs,and that raccwas a deterrninautof charactcrand culture.t"Alrhough his of anim
viewson lacc changedin thc courseof tinre, Kant'.sstarernerltin his Anthropo/ogic racial as
that dcspitePbilanthropistltus,
or philanthropicviervsof man, the mixing of tribes
(Stamme)wouldnot be benellcialfbr mankind, doessccm to suggestthat racialist questior
a s s u m p t i o nds o u n d e r l i eh i s d i s c u s s i o o
n f n a t i o n sa n d r l i b e s . r 5 to the n

I climate ("ob diese
rtwendigkeit an das
:republishedin the
icalgeography,
how-
rrthinkersincluding
lant alsomadestate-
ilhl desSchdnenund
: cites,and pressfbr
3s up the issue of
e a sK a n t m e n t i o n s
nion that insightful
om Volkscharahter,
ifferences
arerncrcly
k the deepercauses,
rnciledby reason.rr
rnresolved
opinions
r would not be con-
On the otherhand,
roponentofa racist
nd readpart ofit to
ls.-"
b o u t t h e n a t u r eo f
Kant-even though
rnciledifferencesof
)ut national charac-
Racewas a subject
Lcallyto the topic of
th his pupil Johann
by color and other
:ure.3a
Although his
inhis Anthropologie
the mixing of tribes
;uggestthat racialist
5 to the nineteenth or early rwentieth century.These problems are supposedto have
Stereotypes,
Prejudice,
andAesthetic
Judgments79
'l'hese
ideashavc a pertinencefor art history, aswcll asfor aesthetics.Kantt
thinking about r-rational
charactcrclirectlyinvolvcsirrt. In his tract on ar.rthropol-
ogy Kant saysthat the Italian characteris rcvcaledin its tastefbr art. Kant'.snatior.ral
stcreotypingwas ir.rfirct long clcpcndenton and implicated in his considerarions
of art and beauty.In the fbr-rrthsection of his Beobacbtungen
of the r76os Kant had
alreadydistirrguished
bctwcennationalcharacteristics
in as much as they depcncled
or.rdistinct fbelingsof the sublimc and beautifll.r('Consistentwith thc remarkshe
was to mirkc in his Anthropo/ogic,K'ant for cxample statecithiit Italian genius had
d i s p l a y e di t s e l f c h i c f l y i n m u s i c , p e i r r r i n g ,s c u l p t u r c ,a n c ia r c h i t e c t u r e . Jl n
' the
c<rnclusiorrof his BeobachtungcnKant cvcn :rdclucesexamplesfrom the history of
art. Oastinga look at history, he notesthat tastecan take constantlychangingforn.rs,
a r . r dt h a t t l ' r e( l r c c k s : r n c lR o n r a n ss h o w e dc l c a r s i g n so f a p u r c f c c l i n g f o r t h e
beautiful and fbr the sublin.rcin proetry,sculpturc,and architccrllre..rn
-l'heories
o f n a t i o n a l c l i f l - c r c n c e os f, s c h o o l so f a r t r e l a t e dt o t h c m , o f
cultur:rl devcloprmentrelirtcdto clinrate,arrd ;rerhapseven of race,were lturthcr
conjoineclin thc great eightecnth-centurylandr.r.r:rrk
of rhe historiographyof art,
Johann Joachirn Winckelnrar: r'r's(]escltit-hte
der Kunst desA/tertunts of r7(t4.
\Tinckelmar.rr.r
cited rnany ancientsourcesof his ide:rs,incluclingPolybiuson rhc
efl-ectof climate. $/inckclrl:rtrtr belicvccltfr:rt art was clcper.rdent
on thc ir-rbornand
dcvelcrpednaturc (Eigenartund Gemritbsarr)of pcopleswho madc it, among orher
f:rctors.J') depcrrdeutupon nation.llcfraracter(\iTinckelmann
Art wasconsecluently
explicity Lrses
the word Nttion), arrd nationalcharactcrwas influencedby heaven,
by which tWinckelmannmc:urt the eff-ectof clirr.rate.
\Winckelmantralsosecmsto haveseencffcctsoFclimateor placenot only
as causative,but :tscoustant.Harald Keller has noted that he comparedqualities
of Etruscarrart with that made by-luscan-bornartistsof the Renaissancc in morc
r e c e n t t i m c s . ' ' 0T h i s i s b c c a u s et V i n c k e l r n a n ne v i d e n t l yb e l i e v e dt h a t n a t i o n a l
differenceswcre constant, and could be related to the eff-ectsof temperature and
the air: thesecould be observedin present-daypeoples.ll\Winckelmannalsomay
have believedthat thesedistinctior-rs
were inborn, since he compared rhe differ-
encesof peoplesfoLu-rdin differing countriesto the differencesfound among species
of animals,although it is r.rotcompletelyclear if theseassumptionsalso involved
racialaswell as national distinctions,as they seemro do in Hume and Kant.a2
It is more usual to trace rhe origins of national srereotypes,
and related
questionsofracial prejudice as they are expressedin art history and in other fields,
B0 Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann

arisen in thc generationsthat fbllowed Hume, Kant, and tVinckclmann. This fuIethodich
paper has howeversugeestedthat even those thinkers who stressed"disinterested nally publi
intercst" as characteristicof the beautiful, like Inrmanuel Kant, or-sor-rghtfbr a r88-qt).
standardof tasteindependentof times and peoples,likc Humc, were caught up in ;. For intror
of peoplesatrd nationswhich ir.rformec{
a categoriz-ation their notions of tasteand in Heinricl
its expressionin thc arts. Artur Rose
It is opcn to debateif the entanglementof thesebeliefi in stereorypical
and n u m b e ro f
r a c i a l i s t t h i n k i n g d i s c r o u n t st h e v a l i c l i t y o f p h i l o s o p h i c a l a r g u m e n t s a b o u t of his dea*
aesthetictheories.But it certair.rly
qualifiesthc universalclaimsof thescthcories,and 6. .fuliusvo
in the leastmakestheir applicabilityproblcmatic.'iyl'hisis particularlythc c:rsefbr desSamme
argumentsabout historv that rvotrldbe fbuncledupon thcir ;rremises.
T'hisproblem 7. E. H. G<
is evirlentin l:rrgestrctchcsof ninetcenth-rr'ncl thought that derive
tw,crrticth-century Renaissan
from or usesuch notions,rvhich r.nayallow for prejudice,not iust of a hcrmet.rerrtic Phaidon,r9
kincl,and for'l.rcrsonel
tirstc,:rsit rvcr.',to conrc in thrc,ughthe back door. 8. As transl
l'his pa;rcrha.srrttcrnptecl
to suggestthat thc prolrlenrof discntlnglingart 9. For Vasa
historyflorn acsthcticprejLrdiccs
atlunrbratc.lbv Ricglanclhis fblkrwersopel)sup on Vasari,"in 1
to a largerand older i-ssue:whcth.-facsthcticvrtluesru.rdbcliefi can be disentangled (Florence:I
'l'hclc
fionr othcr rlotion.\that rrlsorely on stereotypcs. arc ways that tlrcy can be. lo. For the
Btrt ir would [.renecc.ssary
to cnrpkrl.tlif]ircnt anthropologicalancl geogrephical Ilronzino, an
prenrisesancinrcthoclsthan rl.roscthat havc ofrcn bcerrin oprcrationin the histori- lr. .SeeErnsr
ographyof'art. lb plrt ir .ur()rbcrwiry: irlstcadof an enthropo-lleography
of art, in 1 9 7 8 ) .O r i g
chesenscof lrLicdrichltarz-el, l;untaincof art, fcrllorvingin a tradition
t gtbgnrytltie SchoolofA
by PaulVidal de la BIache,renrrrinsto bc claboratccl.ll
cstatrlished rz. For this

I)eurscherI

r3.Pichr,"l

14.Alois Ri
I . S c t rt h r ' s u u r r n r r y i r r . l e n [ ] c r t i n g a n t l ( i h l i s t i a n c V i l l a n - ( , e n t l o s s i", N e t i o n : r i S r e r c o t l ' p c s - A n a/lerhlichtste
I n t r o c l u c r i o n .l h c l l o l c a n d S i g n f i c r r n c oc f - N , t t i o r t l l S t c r c o t y p c si t r I l r t el n . r t i o n l l I { c l a t i o n s ;A n I5. \flolfgar
l r r t c r d i s c i p l i n a l yA p p r o a c h , " i n ' l i ' r c s e W a l a s ,c d . , S t c r t o t . y p trst n l N t t i r , n s ( ( , r a c o w : l n t c r n a t i o n r l Holland, trt
( , u l t u r e l ( i c n t r e , r 9 9 5 ) ,r r - 2 7 . Humanitie:
z . V o ft e i r c , " h - s s a yo n ' l ' r r s t c , "i n ( l h e r l c s f l a r r i s o n , I ) a u l \ W o o t l ,: r r t cJ1r t s o n( i a i g c r - ., ' d s . ,A r t i n ' l - h n r . y I6. SeeAIoi,
r(r4ll r8r5: An Arttltolory o.f(.lhnging 1zl,:as
(()xfirrcl: Blackwcll, zoor), 53r. (Graz and ,

3. David Hunrc, "()f the Standard ol'J'este,"in F.ugcneH MillcL, l)auid Hune. Ess,tys
h[ora/. Polirical Franzosent
a n d L i t t r a r y ( l n c l i a n a p o l i sL: i b e r t v C l l e s s i c sr ,9 [ l 5 ) ,z z 7 . Even thoug

4 . ' f h c r e h a s b c c n a n i n c r e a s i n gl i t c r r t u r e o n R i c g l . ' l ' h i s l c c o u n t f b l ! o w s t h c p e r c e p t i v er e n u r k s b y ideas ofren

( ) t t o P : i c h t , ' A l o i s R i c g l , " r e p u b l i s h e ciln J i i r g ( ) b c r h : r i c l a c l - r eArr,t u r R o s e n a u e r(,l e r t r a u t S c h i k o l a , the time th
 S t e r e o t y p e s ,P r e j u d i c e ,a n d A e s t h e t i c J u d g m e n t s B I

Tinckelmann.I-his zu Krrnsrltistori:clrtnl)raxis.AusgeuLiltlrt Scltruy'az(Munich: Prestel,r9t-), r4r 5z (origi-

Metltodiscltes

essed"disinterested n a l l y ; r u b l i s l r c i la s ' A r t l l i s t o r i : r n sa n d A r t ( l r i t i c s \ / [ : A k r i s R i e g l , " B u r l i n g t o nL l a s , t z i n t r o 5 [ r 9 ( r 3 ] :

Int, or soughtfor a r88-l_r).

:, werecaughtup in l.rchnit, "Juliusvon Schlosser(rti66 rq;8),"

5. For introcluctionsto Schlosseranclhis thotrght secF.cluarcl
:lotionsof tasteand i r r H c i n r i c h D i l l y , c d . . . 4 l t n r i s t r r M o l l r n t r K u u s t g c s t L i t l , t(rB e r l i n : D i e t r i c h R i e n r c r ,1 9 9 o ) ,r i o - f ) 2 ;

A r t r r r R t r s c n a u c r", J u l i u s r ' , r n S c h l o s s e r , i"n ' l ' l t e [ ) i r t i o r r , t r . y , o f ' A r at :n c l t l . r er r r r i c l c sc o n t r r i n c di n t h e

in stereotypical
ancl tttrnrtrcroi kriristlr llcithtt t(r, no. .1 (\\,'inrcl rglill) dcvotcrl to Sclilosstr on thc fifiicrh annivcrsary

argumentsabour o f h i s d c a t h . I ) r i c h r ," R i c g l , " r 5 o 1 . a

, l s o p o i n t s t o t h c c o r r t r r s t l r c t w e c nR i c g l . r n d S c h l o s s e r .
fthesetheories,
and 6. f ulius von Schloss.'r, I )ir Kunst- unrl WunrJcrhanrnrrn der Spiitrenaisstnce.Flin btiraq zur ()schichte

.icularlythe cascfor d e sS a r n n t / u , r s e z(sr 9 o l i ; z n c i c d . , B r e u n s c l l v ei g : K l i r r k h a r c l ta n d B i c l r n a n n , r 9 7 8 ) .

nises.This problem 7 . F . .H . ( l o n r b r i c h , " N o r r n e n c l I ' o n n . ' l - h c S t v l i s t i c( - a t e g o r i c so f A r t H i s t o r y : r n c l t h e i r ( ) r i g i n s i n

thought that derive Icleals,"rcprintctlin Norn aud lirnt: .\tur/ir'siu t/tc Art of't/tt ]lenaissant (r.7(r(r;I-onclon:
[{crr:risserrcc

ut of a hermeneutic P h r i c l r n , r 9 7 r ) ,l l r 9 l i .

backdoor. f l . A s t r a n s l r r r t ' tiln i b i d . , l . i . 1 .

ofdisentanglingart 9 . I r o r V e s e r i ' st r c : I u r ) c n to f - f i r r c i g n : r r t i s t s s, c c ( i i o r g i o [ ] o n s r r n t i ," ( l l i a r t i s t i s t r i u l i c r i n c l l c Z / r c d c l

IlowersopensLlpon Vesari,"irr llVMri StorioqnJittArtista(Atti drl (.lottttstolntenmzionaknel IV(.)enrtnariodellaMorte)

canbe disentangled ( F l o r e r r c c]:n s t i t u t o n a z i o n a l cd i s t r r c l si u l r i n l s i n r e n t r r ,1 , 7 7 6 ) , 7 1 7 - 1 4 . .

Fsthat they can be. r o . I r r r r - t l r cn r o s t r c c t l ) t t r c u n r r c n to f V u s a r i ' sc r i t i < 1 L r c> f l ) o n t o r r n o ,s e el l l i z a b e t h l t i l l i o d , I ) o n t o n n o ,

rl and geographical Rronzino, anrl A//rn'i. A ( ,,:tturloq o/ l'lorcrdnc Art (Ntw I I rn,cnand l lntlon: Yelc Urrivcrsitv I'ress,zool).
ationin the histori- u. Scelrrnst I l. (ionrbrich, I{rtrst uud litrtst'ltritt. Wir[rrng rrril Vhndlungtiner lrlr (('.olounc: l)unront,

3eography of art, ir.r r 9 7 t l ) . ( ) r i g i n a l l y p L r h l i s h . cnl s l d u s o . fl ) n q r t s : a t t l r l t e i r [ n l , / t ( t o i l , 4 r r ( N c v \ b r k : ( . o o p c r U n i o n

rwingin a tradition S c h o o l o f A r t a t r c lr \ r c h i t c c t u r c ,r 9 7 r ) .

1.44 rz. Iirr tliis lroittt, scc Ilans llelting, I)it I)tunth,'tt urtl ibt Kunst, Ein Schutitriqts rlrlr (Munich:

D e t r t s c h e rK u n s t v c r l a g ,r 9 9 z ) , r 5 .

r 3 . l ) : i c h t ," R i c g l , " r 4 4 t .

r4. Alois Riegl, "l)as htrll:inclischcCiruppenporrrrir," ./al,rbuch dtr leuusthistoristben

Satnmlungendes
ional Stereotypes-An alk'rhiiclttstot Ktistrhauvs zi. nos. l-4 (l9ou), 7r-278.
n a t i o n a lR e l a t i o n s :A n r 5 . W o l f g e n g K e r r r p ," l n t r o d u c t i o n " ( t r a n s . l ) l v i c l I l r i t t ) , i n A l o i s R i e g l , Z r , ' G r o u p l ) o r r r a i n r r ao J
(Cracow: International Holland, trans. F.r'elvnM. Kain (l-os Angcles: (lctrv RcseerchCenter for the Histoly of Art and the

Humanitics, r999), r+.

iger, eds.,Art in'l'heory r6. See Alcris Riegl, Hitoriscbc Gramnatik der bildenden Ktinstr, ed. Karl M. Swobocla and C)tto Picht

( ( l r a z a n d C o l o g n e , t . 1 6 6 ) ,q 5 - 6 o . S p e c i l i c r e f e r c n c ci s h c r c m a d e t o a p a s s a g eo n p . t o : ' A n d e n

e.EssaysMoral, Polirical F r a n z o s e ne r w i e ss i c h i n r l z . J h . D e r V o r t c i l c l c r B c i n r i s c h u n ge i n e sT r o p f e n s a n t i k c n s B l u r e s. . . . "

Even though thesercnrarksarL-trlken from the m;rnuscript of an r,rnpublishcdbook proiect, lnd Rieglt
: perceptive remarks by ideas oFtcn chengecl,there is no reason to dor-rbt that thcsc comments represenr lUegl's thought at

.uer,Gertraut Schikola, the time they werc rvrirtcn.

 T

82 ThomasDaCostaKaufmann

17.'l'hcsc idcas of these scholarsare treated in ch:rp.3 of'l'homas l)aCosta Kaufmar.rr.r,The PlaceoJ Centu
Art. Toward a Geographyo.fArt (Chicago rrnd l-onclon: Universitv of Chicago I'rcss, fbrthcoming polnr I
I z o o z ]) . Hume
18. Rcccnt tr:rnslations of Riegl incltul,e Problctnsol S4,/e.Foundations.for a Hitor.y of'Ornam?nt, tr'rt1s. Amerit
E v c l y n K a i n , a n n o t a t i o n s a n d i n t r o . L ) a v i d C a s t r i o t : r ,p r c f a c c H c n r i Z c r n e r ( P r i n c e t o n : P r i n c e t o n y. Kri
'l'he ()roup
Universiry Prcss,r99z); lbrtraitun'o.f'Ho//and. :r::rts. cit.; Pricht, 7.ltel)ractirc of'Art Histor),. 6g+-9
s n Method. trans. [):rvid l]ritt, intlo. (ihristopher S. Wcrod (l.ondon: I-larvcy Miller
R e f l e c t i o no Tiere o
'l'/tt
l)ubf ishcrs, I999); fbr other authors of thc Vicnna School, scc Vioma .\choo/Reader;Po/itis and dere ur
Art Historical Mtthod in thr rg1os,ed. Ohristophcr S. lVooc1(Ncw York: Zonc llooks, zooo). Unters
19.Of. Kenrp, "lntroduction," t4 r5. Woocl, ir.rhis "lntroduction" to Pricht, T/te ['racticeof'Art I{istor], die Nar
t 5 , r a i s c st h c p r o b l c r r ro f n l t i o n a l c o n s t u n t s ,a n d l ) ; i c h t ' . rse s p ( ) n s ct o M c y e r S c h a p i r o ' sc r i t i q u c ( s c c aufdus
b e l o w ) , b t r t p i l s s e s( ) v e rt h i s c c n t r a l i s s u ci n f : r v o ro f o t l r c r c o n s i d c l a t i o n s . ziehen
zo. Harts-(lcorg ( iaciarlcr-,Tnth anl fulttharl (Nov Yrrrk: (lrossroed, r9llr.) z35fL Natur r
z I . l ) l i c h t l ' r i n r s c lw
f a s , t l r c , r c l y : t l v l to
l cf t l r c p r o b l e n r o f t h r u s eo f ' t h e i c l c ao f ' n : r t i o n a lc o n s t a n t si n t h c davon r
I 9 l o s , s e eM c t h o d i s c h czsu r h u n s t h i s t o r i s t L t nl ) m r i s , r 3 9 , a n d n r o r - ce x p l i c i t l v .s u b s c c l u c n t l yi n r ( ) 7 r , schied
c f t h c c o n c c p t o n c n r p i r i c a lb a s c sa g a i n s ti t s " r r r t i o n a l i s t "c r i t -
i b i d . , z q g ; I ) : i c h t ' .osw n c u r s o r yc l c f c r t s o vereini
i c s b c g s t h c q u e s t i o n ,u n c ld o c s n o t i l l r s w c ri s s u c so 1 - l i i s t o r i c ecl l c { i n i t i o no f t h c n e t i o n a l a n c l c t h n i c dern al
r u b r i c s w h i c h h c c o n t i n u c c lt o u s c . wird, dr
zz. Abbd.|can-Brptiste du l\os. lll.flcxiottstitiquu srrr/a polsic u sur ht pt'irtture, preficc l)onriniclue
3?.Dag
I ) i s i r a t , ( r 7 r 9 l r c p r i n t , I ) a r i s :[ i . , , l c N . i t i , , r r r i l cS u p r r i c r r r cc l c s[ J c a L r x - A r t s1,9 9 1 ) ,z ; z f f . Deutsch
23. L)avicl Htrrnc, "()f Netional (lhalacters," in iilrrl,s fulou/, lblitintl rtnl Littntr.y, r97 f}.; the quo- Dagobe
trtion is fronr r9ll. Rudolf
2 4 . I b i d . , 2 o l Jr ) . r o .
1 3 .S e e
z ; . S e e( w i t h r c f i r c n c c t o p r i : v i o u sI i t c r a t u r c ) f o l r n I r n r n c r n , r r h r",H u r n c ' . sl l . c v i s c t l { a c i s r r , ". f o u r n a /
14. For
o . f ' r h eH i s t o r yo f ' l d u s i 1 , n o . 1 ( . l u l v S c p t c n r b c rr 9 9 2 ) : 4 u r l J a ) . Vintage
t (r. Ir<rl its atrtcccclentssee howevcr Margaret'1. Hoclgen, Lhrly Antltntpo/ogy in t/tt.\ixteeuth anrJ relation
h e n t u r i e s( l ' } h i l a c l c l p h i aU: n i v c l s i t y o f l ) c n n s y l v a n i l l ) r c s s ) ,1 9 6 .
S c u e n t e e n tO inner es
z.7.SecJ.A.May, Kanr's(hn,:'eptoJ'(.)eogntpblanlitsllelationtollttnt()ugmp/tiul'l'ltougltt('lbronro: liberal I
'lirronto
U n i v e r s i t yo f l ) r e s s ,r 9 7 o ) , r o 4 .
35.Voll
2 8 . ( l e r d V o l a n d t , " K a n t s V i j l k e r a n t h r o p o l o g i cr l s l ) r o g r r r r l n r , "i n H r r g o [ ) y s e l i n c k a n d K a r - lU l r i c l r
36. Kant
Syrrdranr, e<ls.,Europt und dts ,tdtioildle Sc/bsturstiudnis Inago/ogurhe l)rob/rru in Littntttrr, Kunst
37. Ibid.
und Kulnr tlesrc1.tnd zo._ftltruildots. AlrchencrBeitrrigezur Konrparatistik, 8 (l3onn: Bouvicr, 1988),
18. Kant
3 9 7 o , e s p e c i a l l y4 7 f \ . ofthe Bl
29. Inrniarrucl Kant, Beohachtwtgentibo das ()eJti/t//es ScLtjnenun/ Erhabenen(1764; reprint, Riga, courseo
t77t),9tn.
3 9 . S e e\
3o. Scc fr-rrthcr,SanclerGilnran, "The Figure of'thc Black in (lcrmrn Acsthctic'l'hcorv," Eigbteenth- 4o. Ibid.

(aufmann, The Place oJ'
ago Press,forthcoming
;toryof Ornament, trans.
r (Princeton:Princcton
're
Prauice of Art History.
, o n d o n :H a r v e y M i l l c r
boolReader:Politics and
re Books, zooo).
bePracticeoJ'Art Hrsrcry,
Schapiro\ critiquc (scc
45ff.
.ationalconstantsin thc
r , s u b s e q u c n t l iyn I 9 7 r ,
Lnstits "rationalist"crit-
t h e n a t i o n a la n d e t h n i c
ure,prcfaceDonrinique
y), z5zff.
itefttry,r97 f}.l the quo-
:vised,Racisn," J ou r naI
'g1 in the Sixteenth and
,bicaI Thought (.'l'oronto:
s e r i n c ka n d K a r l U l r i c h
blemin Literatur, Kunst
3 ( B o n n :B o u v i e r ,r 9 8 8 ) ,
rn (1764;reprint, Riga,
ric Theory," Eigltteenth-
Stereotypes,
Prejudice,
andAestheticJudgments B3
Ocntury Stulies 8, no. :1. l7l 9t; I anr gratefirl to Michcllc Foa fbr this and other references.This
p o i t r t h a s a l s o : t l r e a d vb c c t t o b s c r v e d ,r v i t h o u t n r u c h f i r r t h e r d i s c u s s i o r .orr K a n t ' s r e l a t i o n h c r c t o
H u n r c < r r n r u c h c o r t t t t . t c rht fo r v c v e r , b y H c n r y l . o r r i s ( l a t c s , ' 1
l t c S i g t i f i i n g M o n k q y :A ' l ' l t c o r . y o J ' A J i i c a t
Anrcrimu Lirrrary Oriticisrn (()xfirrtl: ()xfirrd Univcrsity Press,1989), r4r.
t ; . l S i t i k r l c r r a i n t n W r n u n . f i . c c 1 .I n g c b o r - gI l e i c l c r n e r r n ,( r T l l r l r c p r i n t S t u t t g a r t : R e c l a n r ,r 9 ( 1 6 ) ,
6 ) 4 - g s : " \ W c n n i c h c i n s c h e n t l eM r i n r t c r r n i t c i n a n c l c rw e g c n c l c r ( l h a r a k t c r i s t i kd c r M c n s c h c n ,c l e r
-l-icre
o c l c r l ) f l u n z c n ,j a s c l b s tc l c r K i i r p c r d c s M i n c r e l r c i c h si n r S r r c i t cs c h c ,d a c l i ce i n e n z . B . b c s o n -
d c r c t t t r t l i n d c r A b s t e n r t n r r n gg c g r i i n r l c t c V r l k s c h a r a k t c r e ,o c l c r a u c h c n t s c h i e d c n cu n c l e l b l i c h e
U n t c r s c h i c c l ec l c r I r a n r i l i c n ,I h s s e t ru s w . A n n c h n r e n , a r r c l c l cd a g e g c ni h r c n S i n r . rc l a r a u fs e r z c n ,d a l l
c l i c N a t u r i n c l i c s c r tS
t t i i c k c g a n z u r r c lg e r c i n c r l e i A n l a g c n g c r n e c h th a b c , u n c l a l l c r U n t c r s c h i c dn u r
luf:irtsscr-cnT,ufiilligkcitcnbcnrhc, so clarl-ichnrrl dic Beschafli'nhcirclcs(icgenstandesin l3crrachtung
z i e h c n , t t r n z t r b c g r e i f i ' n ,c l a l i e r f i i r b c i d c v i c l z u t i c f v c l b o r - g c nl i c g c , a l s c l e l ls i c a u s F . i n s i c h ri n d i c
N : t t u r c l c s( ) b j e k t s s p r c c l t c nl { i i n r l t e n . [ ' , si s t n i c h t : r n d e r c s ,a l s c l e sz - w i c f a c h e
I n t e r c s s cc l c rV c l n r . r n f i ,
t l a v o r rc l i c s c r ' l ' c i cl l a sei n e, j c n c r c l r s: t n t l c r cz r r I l r : r z . c nn i n r n r t , o t l c r : r u c h a f l c k t i c r t , m i t h i n c l i cV e r ,
s c h i c c l c r t h c ittl c l M a x i t n e r t c l c r N : r t u r n r a n n i g f : r l t i g k e i to, c l c rc l e rN a t u r e i n h c i r , w c l c h e s i c h g a r w o h l
v c r c i r t i g c r ltr t s s c na, b e r s o l a n g c s i c f i i r o b j c l < t i v cl r i n s i c l - r t c g
n c h l l t c n w c r r l c n , n i c h t a l l e i n S t r e i t ,s o n -
t l c r n a u c h I l i r r c l c r n i s s cv c t t n l r t s s c r .w
t ,c l c h e c l i c W a h r h c i t l a n g c a u f l a l t e n , b i s c i n M i r t e l g c f i r n c l e n
w i r c l , t l e ss t c t i g c I n t c r c s s cz u v c l c i n i g e n , u n c l d i c V c r n t r n f i h i c r i i b r r z . u f l ' i c d c nz u s t c l l e n . "
3 2 . f ) a g o b e r tI ' r e x " l ) i c F . n t w i c l < l u ntgr r r t i o n u l eSl t i l c i n c i e rn r i t t c l a l t e r l i c h c nK u n s t c l c sA b c n d l a n d e s , "
lhutsrlr Vierrtljahrssrhrifi .fiir Lireraruru,isscnsr;lt,{i uul (,'ristrsgeschirhtcr6 (ry8):3-4, and furthcr,
l)agobert l:rtv, Kunstutisstnschtlilirht OruudJilrycn. l'rolcgonrnt zu rirttr Kunstphilosophir, (Vienna:
I { u d o l f M . I l o h r e r , r 9 4 ( r ) ,( r 6 .
13.Sce, For exernple, Von der utrstbitd.ncn llic(n dcr Mutst/tttt, first publishcd r775.
34. For this poittt sec Isaiah Berlin, Vin and Herder. /it,oSnulia irt the Historl o/'tdeas,(NcwYork:
V i n t a g c , 1 , 1 7 6 )t.6 1 , w h o n o t c s t h a t H c r d c r s a i c l" a n a t i o n i s n r a c l ew h a t i t i s b y ' c l i n r a r e , ' e d u c : r t i o n ,
r e l : r t i o n sw i t h i t s I r c i g h b o u t ' sa, n d o t h e r c h r u r g c a b l a
e n c le n r p i r i c a ll a c t o r s ,a n d n o t b y a n i m p a l p a b l e
inner esscnceor rn unllter,tblc flrctor such as r,rcc or colotrr . . . I-lerdcr protcsts . . . th:rt the grcat
liberal K:rnt inhis Autbropola.gza
enrpl.rasizecl
rlce ,rnc1colour too much."
35. Wcrlflang Bcckcr, ed., Anthropologicin pragnuttisclterHinsicltt (Str.rtrgart:Reclam, r983).
36. Kant, Beobachtungeniiber das {}(tibl desScLinen unl Erhabenen,8r.
3 7 .I b i d . , 8 3 .
;8. Kant, Bcobachtungeniiber das Gelhhl des Sc/tiinenuud Erhattenen,ro7. CF. Gilman, "The Figure
of the Black in (lcln.ran Aesthetic Thcory," which traceschangesin Kant's thinking about race in the
c o u r s co f h i s w r i t i n g .
39. See \i/inckelrnann. Gesclticltteder Kunst desAltertums (Dresden, t764), zzff.
4o. Ibid., rrr.
84 Thomas DaCosta Kaufmann

4 r . l b i d . , 2 . L ,e . g . ,w h c r e q r : a l i t i c so f N e a p o l i t a n sa n d S i c i l i a n sa r c m e n t i o n e d .

4 2 . C f . F r e v ," l ) i c E n n v i c k l u n g n a r i o n a l e rS t i l c , " 3 , b u t w h c t h c r o r n o t t h i s n - r a yb e r e l a t c d t o t h e
nf r a c e , a s F r e yc h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y
n e w ( i n t l - r ce i g h t e e n t hc c n r u r y ) a n t h r o p o l o g i c a lc o n c c p t u : r l i z : r t i o o

c l a i m s i n h i s e f f b r t s t o g r o u n c l h i s o w n r a c i a l i s tt h i n k i n g , i s t . t o ts o c l e a r .

4 3 . O n c w a y r h a r t h c u n i v e r s : rcl l a i m s n r i g h t h a v c b c e n s a v e di s b y t h c q u e s t i o n a b l cc l a i n r t h a t t h o s e
w h o w e r e d c n i g r a t e dr v e r ci n l a c t o f a d i f f c r c n t s p e c i e st h a r t t h e h u m a n . l ' h i s i s a n a r g u m c n t t h a t h a s

been repcatcdlyusedby variousfbrrns of racisrcliscoursc:scc,fbr examplc,thc discussionin ]mmerwahr,

" H u r n c ' s R e v i s e dR a c i s n r . "

4 4 . I - h e h e r i t a g co f R a t z - eal n c i V i d a l d c I a l l l a c h c i n a r t h i s t o r y ,a n d m a n y o t h c r i s s r : e sa c l u n . r b r a t e d
fLrthcr in Tlte P/arc of Art:'fou,ard a
here, as wcll as crrhcrsuggestionsfirr rrpproachcs,erc cliscussecl

Geographyol Art.