Leo Steinberg's 1952 Essay 'The Eye Is a Part of the Mind' Reconsidered for Contemporary Art Discourse

A recent panel discussion at the Hunter MFA show featured Allison Hewitt Ward's observation that art and criticism are less in crisis than they desire to be. This commentary sparked reflection on the art world's current state, where the absence of genuine upheaval is itself problematic. The discussion connects to a reevaluation of Leo Steinberg's 1952 essay 'The Eye Is a Part of the Mind,' which argues against two dominant ideologies: self-entitled progressivism and reactionary traditionalism. Steinberg proposes a materialist phenomenology of art that accommodates historical relativity without falling into relativism. He challenges the notion that modern art abandoned nature imitation, asserting representation remains essential. Steinberg contrasts artists like Pollaiuolo, whose work embodies the struggle of its time, with later figures like Bouguereau, who display mere technical skill. The essay suggests that artistic value lies in the authentic engagement with reality within historical constraints, not in progressive technical refinement. This perspective is applied to contemporary debates, critiquing Marxist art historians like T.J. Clark and Theodor Adorno for their dismissals of modern culture. References are made to figures such as Arthur Danto, Christopher S. Wood, and Michael Baxandall, with Steinberg's ideas offering an anti-teleological view of art history. The essay remains relevant for navigating present artistic challenges without idealizing past or future utopias.