Style And Sequence:George Kubler On The Shape Of Time

Confronting the problem of “what is time” by Saint Augustine,art historian George Kubler(1912-1996)adopted a different approach from the philosophers dedicated to the essence of time by portraying or representing the shape of time with man-made things.The shape of time is analogous with fibrous bundles,with the cross and the vertical section representing respectively the study of synchronous structure of “style" and diachronous process of “sequence”.The first chapter “STYLE: THE CROSS-SECTION OF THE HISTORY OF THINGS” examines the sixdimensional manifold invented by Kubler,the reason why he critiques the traditional theory of style,and the explanatory power of his reductive theory of visual style.Kubler argues to restrict the notion of style into synchronic synonymous choices,and he considers visual style as a manifold of six dimensions: craft & format(shape),signage & modus(meaning),and period & sequence(time).What is worth noting in this complexity is that although Kubler regards the notion of style as unsuitable to diachronous durations,he never exclude temporality from the analysis of style.Rather,his critique of the diachronous notion of style is focused on its typical usage: the biological metaphor,because the linear teleological historical view implied in the biological metaphor of style makes the coeval heterogeneity obscure.The problem that confronts Kubler is that of neglecting the complexity of style in traditional theories and what is crucially need is not to substitute the diachronous with the synchronous,but to establish a new model of the diachronous-synchronous.Moreover,putting too much emphasis on the multiplicity of artistic style may lead to the threaten of fragmentation.The second chapter “SEQUENCE: THE VERTICAL SECTION OF THE HISTORY OF THINGS” discusses the concept of sequence and others,the representations of the constructions of sequences,and the temporal and the spatial changes of sequences.Kubler replaces the concept of “style” with “sequence”,which consists of a sequence of interrelated solutions to serial problems arranged according to their "systematic age".The constructions of the sequence are represented as that of things(solutions)and of people(artists).From the perspective of things,“prime objects” and “replications” constitute every sequence,in which the value of the latter is demonstrated,and overseas intellectuals such as Wen Fong draw on inspirations from the notions of“prime objects” and “replications”.From the perspective of people,artists can be divided into six types following the location of their “entrance” into sequences: precursors,hommes à tout faire,obsessives,evangelists,the ruminative and rebels.The temporal evolution is actuated by inventing,replicating,and discarding.As to the relation of the first two forces,i.e.,the relation of invention and tradition,of continuity and discontinuity,although Kubler’s idea seems ambiguous,the emphasis is still more on the supplement than the contradiction of tradition and invention.The spatial transition of the sequence is correlated to “the geography of art”(by Thomas Da Costa Kaufmann),on which Kubler provided some case studies and theoretical elaborations.Thus,he could be called as the bond of the Kunstgeographie and its American descendants.The third chapter “SHAPING TIME: KUBLER’S LEGACY” reflects from a more detached view on what Kubler means to art history.To the discipline itself,his paradigm can be characterized as de-territorial(trans-disciplinary in method)and de-centered(non-Eurocentric in objects).To the neighboring artistic practice,ideas in The Shape of Time share common spirit with the contemporaneous Minimalism.In conclusion,his understanding of style and sequence as well as his de-territorial and de-centered orientations is fairly post-modern.The Shape of Time(1962),the reformative manifesto,is even almost ten years in advance of the emergence of the New Art History.