Traces of psychology: the art historical writings of Ernst Kris

T H O M A S ROESKE

Traces of Psychology: The Art Historical Writings of Ernst Kris

When Ernst Kris met the young student Ernst H. Gombrich, who is revered today as o n e of the important art historians of the twentieth century, he r e c o m m e n d e d to him that he give u p art history. This advice was based less on any d o u b t of the young man's professional attitude than on Kris' own aloofness f r o m a subject which he considered to be i m m a t u r e in terms of methodology. Gombrich recalled his words: "We really know m u c h too little about art to be able to draw any definitive conclusions. T h e best thing o u r colleagues can d o is to take up a m o r e developed branch of knowledge." Kris proposed psy­

chology as an alternative, even if he h a r b o u r e d reservations about the application of this discipline for problem solving in his own field (Gombrich 1984, 224).

T h e o u t c o m e of this perspective for Kris in the long run is well known: H e concentrated on psychoanalysis a n d aban­

d o n e d art history. But what effect did this ambivalent attitude have on his strictly art historical publications, which originated before and u p to 1938, alongside his psychoanalytical texts?

This essay is c o n c e r n e d with a question about Kris the art historian which has u p to now curiously been neglected.

It will point out the basic concepts of his writings in this field and their origins and thereby show that Kris' doubts about his profession as an art historian were induced not only by the

theories of Freud but that of others as well. It may offer a contribution to the recovery of psychological and psychoana­

lytical influences on art history of the 1920s a n d 30s (cf.

H e r d i n g 1990, 1994).

T h a t first meeting with Gombrich took place in 1931. Kris had been working for nine years in the sculpture and applied art collections at the Kunsthistorisch.es Museum in Vienna and was at the height of his f a m e as the a u t h o r of art historical publications.­ At this time he was literally dividing his activities

American Imti^it. V o l . 5 8 , N o . K, 4 6 3 - 4 7 7 . €> 2 0 0 1 b y T h e J o h n s H o p k i n s I ' n i v e r s i t v P r e s s

463

between art history and psychoanalysis. Encouraged by Sigmund Freud and by his wife Marianne Rie, in 1924 he had untertaken a training analysis with H e l e n e Deutsch.

After 1927 h e be­

came a practising psychoanalyst himself without neglecting the duties of m u s e u m work. Gombrich strikingly describes the great psychical and physical strain of this double­life. At the beginning of the 1930s his doubts about art history gave Kris the courage to withdraw f r o m the profession, although Freud advised him against doing so (Gombrich 1984, 226). And in fact Kris r e m a i n e d faithful to art history until his emigration in 1938, although the stress between the d e m a n d s of both activi­

ties continued to increase. In 1933 Kris b e c a m e co­editor of the magazine Imago; f r o m 1934 onwards he trained therapists at the Viennese Inslitut fur Psychoanalyse. During 1933­1935 h e was simultaneously involved in the complete restructuring of the collection at the Kunsthistorisches Museum and writing collection guides.

At this critical m o m e n t , Kris created a characteristic outlet for himself which assured his reputation as a pioneer: From 1932 he was the first professional art historian to publish essays which applied his psychoanalytical (ego­psychological) point of view to objects of art historical research. These were also his first ever psychoanalytical publications. In the beginning he took great pains to achieve a real dialogue between the two subjects, insofar as he published the first of these texts in two versions. Its subject is the Austrian sculptor Franz Xaver Messerschmidt (1736­1786), in whose late works—the so called

"Charakterkopfe" (characterheads)—Kris believed h e had f o u n d symptoms of a psychosis. These versions, for the Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien (Yearbook of the Art Historical Collections in Vienna) in 1932 and for Imago in 1933, clearly take account of the respective readership not only in the introductions, but also in their whole form a n d even in their language (cf. MacGregor 1989, 252­253). In spite of all this effort his art historian colleagues did not show any interest in this widening of their perspective. So Kris did not follow this u p but only wrote from the overlapping area in Imago and in an i n d e p e n d e n t publication, the writing he published in collabo­

ration with Otto Kurz 1934, Die Legende des Kunsilers (The Myth

of the Artist). As he t u r n e d to psychoanalysis, he published fewer and fewer art historical texts, before his emigration to the U.S.A. in 1938. And once he left Vienna, he never published again as an art historian.

In 1952 Kris collected most of his psychoanalytical essays on art in the volume Psychoanalytical Explorations in Art. Thereby h e stressed their separation f r o m the rest of his art historical writings a n d obscured at the same time the fact that his interest in psychoanalysis was n o t solely based on Freud. Of special importance in this respect was the g r o u n d i n g of his thinking in the tradition of Viennese art history.

By 1922 Kris had completed studies in art history, archae­

ology and history at the University of Vienna.

His main tutors in art history were Max Dvorak a n d Julius von Schlosser. Von Schlosser who also supervised his dissertation called Kris his

"Urschiiler" (arch­ or original pupil) (von Schlosser 1934, 201). In fact Kris is in many respects a classical e x p o n e n t of the later Viennese School: the orientation of his art historical research—in terms of period, subject matter a n d methodol­

ogy—clearly shows that von Schlosser was the main influence on the art historian Kris.

A d o m i n a n t feature of study in Vienna at that time was a h a n d s on approach to the object of research: Nearly all the f o u n d i n g fathers of the Viennese School had worked for a while in a museum. Von Schlosser directed the collections of sculpture a n d applied art at the Kunsthistorisches Museum from 1901 to 1923. This practical experience was decisive for Kris in the choice of his first career. In 1922 he started working in von Schlosser's d e p a r t m e n t , first as a voluntary assistant, then, f r o m 1927 onwards, as an assistant custodian (Gombrich

1984, 222).

T h e strictly art historical material he published until he emigrated was typical of his school of origin, even down to the young scholar's chosen study period. H e devoted himself to works f r o m the centuries between 1400 a n d 1600 and espe­

cially, like the late Dvorak and von Schlosser, to Mannerism,

which in the 19th Century was still neglected by research as

being an epoch of decline. And even when in Kris' writings of

the late 1930s he tentatively e x p a n d e d the time f r a m e of the

given subject matter, he never overstepped the period bound­

aries laid down by von Schlosser, who included art u p to Goya (Lachnit 1990, 155).

Likewise, Kris' choice of artistic genres d e p e n d e d on von Schlosser. Amongst the topics of Kris' research were sculptures as well as paintings. But above all he concentrated on cut glass, gems, cameos and works of art by goldsmiths. This interest owed less to the fact that the curator a n d subsequent Director of the collection, Leo Planiscig, was a leading expert in Italian Renaissance Sculpture (cf. Ritvo 1966, 487) than—as Kris himself admitted—to von Schlosser's research into Kunst­ u n d W u n d e r k a m m e r n (art­ a n d curiosity­cabinets) and wax portrai­

ture (Kris 1926, 138).

Kris once justified his chief concern with applied art and m i n o r art works by saying that art history had to consider the complexity of interwoven historical ambitions:

T h u s the ideal challenge was presented, to show the u n e n d i n g n u m b e r of interweaving currents of diverse spiritual layers: to realise that the p h e n o m e n a of histori­

cal life constitute only a giant­theory. As a methodologi­

cal c o n s e q u e n c e however it appears that the j o b of historical research is to introduce the deviations of intellectual movements alongside the great lines of development in o r d e r to achieve an overall historical picture. (Kris 1927a, 253)

This statement reveals already the influence of Freudian meta­psychology. But there was an even m o r e concrete connec­

tion between Kris, the expert in objets d ' a r t and Freud. As is known the f o u n d e r of psychoanalysis also valued some works of "minor art"; beside little sculptures he collected gems and cameos (cf. Freud and Art, 1989). And it was through this part of his collection that the two were first led to a close acquain­

tance (Ritvo 1966, 487). Unfortunately Freud's precious stones have not yet been the subject of individual study, although

historians know that they played an important role in the early

period of psychonalysis: Between 1912 and 1928 Freud gave

silver rings with inlaid gems to his closest confidants (cf.

Wittenberger 1995, 212-217). T h e possible influence Kris' knowledge had in the choice of the gifts remains to be explored.

Eventually, Kris' education in the Viennese School of Art History also influenced his methodology. H e r e his concentra­

t i o n

on exact descriptions of the works u n d e r discussion and

on questions of attribution should be m e n t i o n e d . T h e empha­

sis on seemingly u n i m p o r t a n t details resembles the methodol­

ogy of Giovanni Morelli, a connoisseur highly respected by von Schlosser—and admired also by Freud. Freud c o m p a r e d this attention to trivia to psychoanalysis, which also values the observation of seemingly trivial details (Freud 1914, 222). For Kris, an expert in both professions, this similarity between the dispositions of art history and psychoanalysis must have been reason e n o u g h to try to c o m b i n e them.

I n d e e d not only the general methodology but some of the core ideas of the young art historian originated in his Viennese t r a i n i n g . Since his d i s s e r t a t i o n o n Die Verxvendung des

Naturabgusses bei Wenzel Jamnitzer und Bernhard Palissy (The Use of the Life Cast by Wenzel Jamnitzer and Bernhard Palissy), edited in 1926 as an article with the title "Der Stil 'rustique',"

Kris r e t u r n e d repeatedly to the tension h e f o u n d in a n u m b e r of late Renaissance artworks between a crass super realism

a n d classical concepts of beauty. An example of this is the so called Merkelsche table centrepiece by Wenzel Jamnitzer f r o m

1549 (today in the Rijksmuseum Amsterdam) (111. 1): Al­

though its construction follows Renaissance models, the foot a n d goblet edge overflow with a multiplicity of the tiniest animal and plant mouldings whilst on the rim of the upper­

most vase, in the finest silver, cast meadow grasses are visible (cf. Kris 1926, 147­150). This crucial concept of the effective­

ness of a thrillingly tense duality within the mannerist aes­

thetic, Kris acknowledged to be merely a continuation of his teacher's c o m m e n t s on wax portraiture of the time (Kris 1926,

138).'"

H e also took u p von Schlosser's concern to demonstrate the autonomy of the work of art. Von Schlosser repeatedly spoke out againsl subsuming ai l history into cultural history—

even if mainly to distinguish himself from Riegl and Dvorak

Illustration I: W e n / e l Jamnitzer, Merkelsche table centrepiece, 1549, Rijksmuseum Amsterdam

(Mcdicus 1993, 134). Building on the literary critic Karl Vossler's ideas he separated the history of style (as actual art history, which considers artistic achievement) from the history of language (whose primary interest is the development of cultural communication) (Lachnit 1990, 157). In doing so he distinguished the contributions of inspired individuals f r o m the m o r e m u n d a n e achievements of their contemporaries.

Kris likewise emphasized the achievement of the creative individual in many of his writings. O n o n e occasion h e juxtaposed the "Stilstufe" (stylistic step) of a work against the general "Stilphase" (stylistic phase) (Kris 1934a, 213) and on a n o t h e r occasion the "Eigenart des Kiinstlers" (artist's original­

ity) against the "Formempfinden d e r Generation" (form­sensi­

bility of the generation) (Kris 1927a, 244). H e emphasized that

the particularly ingenious Merlkelsche table centrepiece was

created without being commissioned; and that consequently

o n e could conclude that "the artistic intention speaks directly

to us" (Kris 1926, 147). Clearly this emphasis on intention can

lead to (individual­)psychological questions.

Explicit psychological interest was already present a m o n g the f o u n d i n g fathers of the Viennese School—Riegl (cf. von Schlosser 1934, 201), Dvorak a n d even von Schlosser. Al­

though the latter had always expressed suspicion about the significance of psychology for aesthetics, it was h e who favored concentrating on the psychology of the individual artist in­

stead of on the "Kunstwollen" of Alois Riegl (cf. H o f m a n n 1984/85, 6). Moreover in his study Kunst- und Wunderkarnmern der Spatrenaissance (Art­ a n d Curiosity­Cabinets of the late Renaissance) he e x a m i n e d the psychology of the collector, and in his essay about wax portraits he looked at the magical concepts associated with chosen objects (cf. Lachnit 1990, 153­

54). O n e psychological process which at that time was often referred to in the art historical studies of the Viennese School, especially by Dvorak, was of importance for Kris' subsequent development: "Einfuhlung" or empathy. This process, theoreti­

cally established in late 19th century Germany by J o h a n n e s Volkelt in Leipzig and T h e o d o r Lipps in Munich, b e c a m e an integral c o m p o n e n t of Expressionism (cf. Dri'ie 1983) and was f u n d a m e n t a l for what was later known as "German psychol­

ogy". Although Kris did not apply empathy as avidly as some c o n t e m p o r a r y art historians (e.g. Wilhelm Fraenger), h e too exaggerated its application to the point of speculation.

T h u s in 1925, describing a c a m e o by J a c o p o da Trezzo, which shows the face of the Arch Duchess Johanna, Princess of

Portugal, he not only emphasises the "suggestive expression of the features which seems to mirror a sad, compelling h u m a n destiny" (Kris 1923­25, 166), but, in a detailed description of the individual features, he attempts to characterise the indi­

vidual portrait. H e talks about the "tapering c o n t o u r lines of the face" which "run rapidly f r o m the c h e e k b o n e s to the chin and accentuate the hectic spiritualistic aspect of the features"

(Kris 1923­25, 164). In an essay from 1934, interpreting a marble bust of the youthful Karl VI by Gabriel de Grupello he seeks to penetrate the psychology of a character even further:

"The physiognomic expression, which serves this m e d i u m of representation is of a special kind: S u d d e n astonishment and light tension e m a n a t e from the features of the boy: H e wants to look older, to be a great man, like his b r o t h e r (Joseph I.)"

(Kris 1934a, 214). Special attention to empathy caused Kris to

see a problem in Messerschmidt's character-heads. T h e failure of the attempt to empathise with these grimaces, indicated to him the f o u n d e r i n g of an essential (psychological) art histori­

cal methodology and m a d e the completion of the discipline t h r o u g h psychoanalysis seem imperative (Kris 1933, 392­394).

In addition to the legacy of the Viennese School men­

tioned above, there is also evidence that an influence on Kris' psychological interests came f r o m the H a m b u r g School of Art History. H e wrote an e l o q u e n t dedication of his publication Die Legende des Kiinstlers of 1934 to the Kulturwissenschaftliche Bibliothek Warburg then housed in H a m b u r g . A n o t h e r reflec­

tion of the Warburgian perspective occurred in the essay "Die Arbeiten des Gabriel de Grupello fur d e n Wiener Hof" (The Works of Gabriel de Grupello for the Gourt at Vienna) of the same year in which Kris juxtaposes the sculpture of Saint Bartholomew by de Grupello, dated 1710­16, (111. 2) with Bernini's Veritd, dated 1646­52, (111. 3) and draws attention to the fact that h e r e the same pose "is committed to a contrary intention of expression" (Kris 1934a, 216)—a relationship which Aby Warburg would have called "inversion" (cf. Gombrich 1970, 2 4 7 / 2 4 8 ) . But although Kris illustrates this comparison it is only m e n t i o n e d briefly in the text, as is the case with other psychological observations in Kris' early writing."

Kris' psychoanalytic leanings not only resulted f r o m the psychological interests h e e n c o u n t e r e d as an art history stu­

dent; for in his Curriculum Vitae of 1939 he indicated that alongside history and art history he also studied psychology at the University of Vienna. This reference is missing in the Curriculum Vitae from the time of his graduation in 1922—

the year Karl Bi'ihler, the influential psychologist, took over the Viennese Chair for Psychology (Gombrich 1983, 101).

Biihler, representative of the so­called Wurzburg School, was initially c o n c e r n e d with the Psychology of thought, but subsequently was c o n c e r n e d with problems of expression and with language. It was already noted by Gombrich that Biihler's studies in expression, particularly as they are presented in the book Ausdruckstheorie-Das System an seiner Geschichte aufgezeigt

(Theory of Expression­The System Demonstrated by means of

its History) of 1933 had considerable influence on Kris'

ss

v.

Illustration 2: Gabriel de Grupello, Saint Bartholomew, 1710-16, Bayerisches Nationalniuseum, Munich

ft

V m ss

•lustration S: Lorenzo Bernini, Veritd, 1646-52, Galleria Borghese, R o m e

Messerschmidt research (Gombrich 1983, 102).

But also in his art historical texts Kris repeatedly talks about such matters;

for example, in the Grupello essay, he analyzed the "physiog­

nomic change in the prince's features" revealed in the sculptor's portraits of Prince Johann Wilhelm von der Pfalz (Kris 1934a, 208).

An essay for the Jahrlmch der kunsthistorischm Sammlungen in Wien of 1930, bearing the u n r e m a r k a b l e title "Uber eine gotische Georgs­Statue u n d ihre nachsten Verwandten­Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis d e r osterreichischen Skulptur im f r u h e n 15. J a h r h u n d e r t " (A Gothic Statue of St. George and its Glosest Relatives—A Contribution to the Knowledge of Austrian Sculp­

ture in the Early 15th Century), provides in fact an extraordi­

nary illustration of the synthesis of the different influences in Kris' work n o t e d above. This seminal text offers us an opportu­

nity to examine the psychological leanings in Kris' art histori­

cal works in detail.

T h e work of art which stands at the core of the essay had been f o u n d shortly before in the attic of the Pilgrims C h u r c h of Grosslobming in Steir, Austria (111. 4 a n d 5). Kris' publica­

tion was t h e r e f o r e the first devoted to the piece and conse­

quently the a u t h o r m a d e great efforts to integrate this St.

George in a carefully reconstructed masterpiece. To this e n d the a u t h o r with great virtuosity applied the whole historical methodology right u p to Morelli. In addition, he sought to pinpoint m o r e exactly the "artistic quality of the composition, the originality of invention" (123) he observed in the statue of the dragon slayer. To this end, Kris compares the statue with o t h e r versions of the St. George figure "from about the same period and in approximately the same artistic circle" (127) so that it becomes clear that the relief­like invention on ^{t h e l i o n I} and back view of the Grosslobming figure adheres to strict parameters. It falls into the conventional "taste of the period style," though "carried out masterfully" (153)—the compara­

tive examples shown by Kris to be not nearly as convincingly executed as the Austrian piece.

In summary, the St. George figure by the Master of

Grosslobming tor Kris was "highl) individual and not of a Form

absorbed f r o m the conventional period style" (143), a phrase

1

Illustration

l

Mann of Grotdobniiogi Saint

i -loo,

Ostcrrcic hischc G a l e r i c liclvcdt re. V i c u n a

reminiscent of von Schlosser's distinction between the history of style and the history of language. However, Kris subse­

quently reformulated his conclusion, stating that the work of the Austrian sculptor is "not only different f r o m that of his contemporaries, it is of a different type. Using the same foundations, with the m e d i u m available to everyone, h e not only f o u n d a new solution; he posed a new problem" (127, cf.

131). An accompanying footnote leads to the c o n t e m p o r a n e ­ ous psychology of thought, "whose paradigm of problem and solution offers a beneficial perspective for some historical investigations". This suggests the ideas of Karl Btihler, whose specific branch of the psychology of thought at the Wurzburg School required proving that t h o u g h t does not just flow mechanically but is directed towards a goal. Kris thus arrived at a psychological basis for demonstrating an "original artistic

a c h i e v e m e n t , " w h i c h s o m e t i m e s i n v o k e s t h e issue of

"Verfruhung" (predating): T h e St. George statue displays "a veiled contradiction ( . . . ) between intention and means, which only later generations in the 15th Century were able to achieve in a generally accepted f o r m " (153).

But the St George essay also contains clear evidence of Freud's influence, especially in the emphatic description of the statue with which the text starts. Kris focuses h e r e on the exact m o m e n t of the battle:

the right foot treads on the tail where it joins the body.

T h e foot is taut and stretched out in o r d e r to put pressure on the spine and lame the mighty and danger­

ous tail, which, trailing outwards, folds itself a r o u n d the knight's right foot, trying to press him against the wings, then goes between his legs attempting to wrap r o u n d the left foot. But the strength which is on the verge of filling

the still powerful bends of the ribbed tail is n o longer sufficient; o n e almost feels how the cleverly chosen

position of the foot maintains its hold. T h e saint takes

advantage of the situation to sirike the decisive blow. A

m o m e n l later the head of the virtually beaten monster

will sink down limply." (122)

T h e o b s e r v a t i o n of t h e s t o n e c a r v i n g is t r a n s l a t e d w i t h E x p r e s s i o n i s t v e r v e i n t o t h e c l i m a c t i c m o m e n t o f a d r a m a t i c n a r r a t i v e . B e y o n d this Kris s e e k s to s h o w w h a t m a y h a v e i m m e d i a t e l y p r e c i p i t a t e d t h e s i t u a t i o n b e i n g d e p i c t e d . T h e r e a r o f t h e f i g u r e p r o v i d e s c l u e s h e r e :

S o m e c o n c l u s i o n s a b o u t t h e m o m e n t b e f o r e t h e s t r u g g l e c a n a l s o b e d r a w n : S a i n t G e o r g e s e e m s t o h a v e t r o d d e n o n t h e d r a g o n ' s b o d y as h e e m e r g e d f r o m t h e r o c k s . H i s s w o r d h a s r e m a i n e d c a u g h t o n t h e w i n g w h i c h m i g h t h a v e b e e n at first o n l y h a l f e x t e n d e d , a n d is t h u s h e l d b a c k ; t h a t h e h a d t o d u c k t h e w i n g c a n b e i n f e r r e d f r o m t h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e r i g h t f o o t ( 1 2 3 ) .

T h i s ( r e ) c o n s t r u c t i o n o f successive m o m e n t s in a s c u l p ­ t u r e is r e m i n i s c e n t , p a r t l y e v e n in its d r a m a t i c c o n s t r u c t i o n , o f F r e u d ' s p r o c e d u r e d u r i n g his analysis in 1914 of t h e Moses o f M i c h e l a n g e l o in w h i c h t h e p o s e o f t h e R e n a i s s a n c e s t a t u e is i n t e r p r e t e d as " t h e r e m a i n s of a m o v e m e n t t h a t h a s a l r e a d y t a k e n p l a c e " ( F r e u d 1914, 2 2 9 ) . Similarly, Kris p r e s e n t s t h e M a s t e r o f G r o s s l o b m i n g as a clever, p s y c h o l o g i s i n g artist.

F r e u d , w h o states at t h e b e g i n n i n g of h i s essay t h a t h e was n o c o n n o i s s e u r b u t a l a y m a n ( F r e u d 1914, 2 1 1 ) , b e c o m e s t h e m o d e l f o r t h e a r t h i s t o r i a n Kris' analysis.

Kris' essay a b o u t t h e M a s t e r of G r o s s l o b m i n g is t o b e s e e n as a c a u t i o u s a t t e m p t to p u t p s y c h o l o g y in t h e s e r v i c e of a r t history. B u t d e s p i t e t h e e v i d e n t i n f l u e n c e s of t h e p s y c h o l o g i s t B u h l e r a n d t h e p s y c h o a n a l y s t F r e u d , t h e legacy o f J u l i u s v o n S c h l o s s e r still d o m i n a t e s at this t i m e . O n l y slightly later, t h e two M e s s e r s c h m i d t essays o f 1932 a n d 1 9 3 3 will i n d i c a t e in h i s w r i t i n g s f o r t h e first t i m e a c o n f l i c t b e t w e e n Kris' two f a t h e r

figures. Ii was o n l y with Kris' e m i g r a t i o n a n d t h e f o r c e d a b a n d o n m e n t of h i s c a r e e r a t a E u r o p e a n m u s e u m t h a t F r e u d a t last e m e r g e d as t h e victor.

Schwanthaler Str. 18 60594 Frankfurt am Main

Germany

N o t e s

1. E x p e r t s r e g a r d t h e s e in s o m e c a s e s as " e x e m p l a r y a n d e x h a u s t i v e " ( G r a m a c c i n i 1 9 8 5 , 2 2 1 ) , o r as "still f u n d a m e n t a l t o d a y " ( S c h u l t e s 1 9 8 6 , 1). N e v e r t h e l e s s t h e y a r e a w a i t i n g a r e p r i n t — i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e p s y c h o a n a l y t i c a l e s s a y s w h i c h w e r e p u b l i s h e d in o n e v o l u m e in 1 9 7 2 . E v e n a r e l i a b l e i n d e x is m i s s i n g . N e i t h e r

" W r i t i n g s o f E r n s t Kris" i n The Psychoanalytic Study of the

Child,

2. E s p e c i a l l y t w o b o o k s h a d c o n t r i b u t e d t o h i s l a m e : t h e v o l u m e c o - w r i t t e n w i t h Fritz E i c h l e r Die Karneen im Kunsthistorischen Museum. V i e n n a 1 9 2 7 , a n d t h e s u r v e y Meister und Meisterwerke der Stein schneidekunsl in der italienischen Renais­

sance. V i e n n a 1 9 2 9 .

3. W e n d l a n d 1 9 9 9 , 3 8 8 , is e r r o n e o u s w h e n s h e w r i t e s " z u s a m m e n m i t H e l e n e D e u i s c h " - p o s s i b l y a t r a n s l a t i o n m i s t a k e .

4. H e s t u d i e d a r c h a e o l o g y u n d e r L. R u s c h e a n d E. L o w y , h i s t o r y u n d e r O . R e d l i c h . Cf. W a l l e r Ernsl Ki is, " C u r r i c u l u m V i t a e . " In liigorosenakl Kris. A r c h i v e s o f t h e U n i v e r s i t y o f V i e n n a ( c o p i e s i n t h e H a m b u r g e r A r c h i v z u r W i s s e n s c h a f t s e m i g r a t i o n in d e r K u n s t g e s c h i c h t e ) .

5. U p t o n o w o n l y t h e s t r o n g d e p e n d e n c e o f Kris u p o n F r e u d h a s b e e n n o t e d in t h e l i t e r a t u r e . Cf. G o m b r i c h 1 9 8 4 , 2 2 9 .

6. Kris r e a c h e d t h e 1 8 t h C e n t u r y in h i s essay o n M e s s e r s c h m i d t . 7. T h i s a n d t h e f o l l o w i n g a r e t r a n s l a t i o n s by t h e a u t h o r .

8. H o f f e r 1 9 5 7 , 3 6 0 , e m p h a s i z e s in h i s o b i t u a r y Kris' "special l i k i n g f o r p i c k i n g o u t m i n u t e details".

9. Kris s p e a k s o f a "krassen u b e r r e a l i s t i s c h e n T y p u s " ( 1 9 2 9 a , 9 6 ) . H e w a n t e d to p r e s e r v e t h e t e r m "Naturalistik" f o r this, cf. Kris 1 9 2 6 , 1 5 0 .

10. O n t h i s c o n c e p t in D v o r a k s e e H o f m a n n 1 9 8 4 / 8 5 , 6.

1 1. Cf. f o r e x a m p l e Kris 1 9 2 9 , vol. 1,3, w h e r e h e r e c o m m e n d s e x p l o r a t i o n o f t h e e a r l y s u p e r s t i t i o u s m o t i f s f o r t h e art o f s t o n e c a r v i n g in t h e c o l l e c t i o n s <>l a n t i q u i t y a n d t h e m i d d l e a g e s .

12. Kris r e f e r s l o t h e C h a r a k t e r k o p f e o f M e s s e r s c h m i d t a l r e a d y in 1 9 2 7 , 2 2 7 ( N o . 6 6 4 ) .

References

D r u e , H e r m a n n . 1 9 8 3 . "Die p s y c h o l o g i s c h e A s t h e l i k i m D e u t s c h e n K a i s e r r e i c h . " In

Ideengeschichtt

Philosophic und bildende

F r e u d , S i g m u n d . 1 9 1 4 . " T h e M o s e s o f M i c h e l a n g e l o . " S.E. 13: 2 1 1 - 2 3 8 .

F r e u d a n d Art. 1 9 8 9 .

Freud and Art.

Personal Collection oj Antiquities

Lynn

and

University oj

York/

G o m b r i c h , E r n s t H . 1 9 7 0 . Airy Warburg. An

Intellectual Biography.

. 1 9 8 3 . " K u n s t w i s s e n s c h a f t u n d P s y c h o l o g i c v o r f u n f z i g J a h r e n . " In Wien und die lintwicklung der kunsthistorischen

Method*. XXV.

Kunstgeschichte, CIHA, Wien 4.­10.9.1983. V o l . 1. V i e n n a : 9 9 - 1 0 4 .

. 1 9 8 4 . " T h e S t u d y o f Art a n d t h e S t u d y o f M a n . R e m i n i s c e n c e s o f C o l l a b o r a­ t i o n wilh Ernsl Kris." In Ernst H. G o m b r i c h . Tributes: Interpreters oj Out

Cultural

Tradition. O x f o r d : 2 2 1 ­ 2 3 3 .

G r a m a c c i n i , N o r b e r t o . 1 9 8 5 . "Das g e n a u e A b b i l d d e r N a l u r . R i c c i o s T i e r e u n d d i e T h e o r i e d e s N a l u r a b g u s s e s s e i t C e n n i n o C c n n i n i . " In Nalur und Anlike in der Renaissance ( E x h i b i t i o n C a t a l o g u e ) . I . i e b i c g h a u s , M u s e u m a l t e r Plastik. Frank­

f u r t a m M a i n : 1 9 8 ­ 2 2 5 .

H e r d i n g , Klaus. 1990. "Warburgs ' R e v e n a n t s ' - p s v c h o - i k o n o g r a p h i s c h g e z a h m t . " In Kritisrhe Berichte N.F. 18,3: 27-37.

. 1994. "Panofsky u n d d a s P r o b l e m d e r Psycho-Ikonologie." In Erwin Panofsky.

Beitrdge des Symposiums 1992. Edited by B r u n o R c u d c n h a c h . Berlin: 145-170.

H o f f e r , Willy. 1957. "Obituary: E r n s t Kris 1900-1957." In International Journal of Psychoanalysis 38: 359-362.

I l o f m a n n , W e r n e r . 1 9 8 4 / 8 5 . "Was bleibt von d e r ' W i e n e r

Schule'?"

Mitteilungen itrs Osterreii hischen Kunsthislorikerverbandes, I / I I : 4-8.

Kris, Ernst. 1923-25. "Vergessene Bildnisse d e r Erzherzogin J o h a n n a , Prinzessin von P o r t u g a l . " In Jahrlnurh der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien 36: 163-166.

. 1926. "Dei Stil ' r u s t i q u e ' . " In Jahrbuch derkunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien N.F. 1: 137-208.

. 1927. ( t o g e t h e r with Fritz Eiehler) Die Kameen im Kunsthistorischen Museum.

V i e n n a .

. 1927a. " G e o r g H o e f n a g e l u n d d e r wissenschaftliehe N a t u r a l i s m us." In Festschrift fur Julius Schlosser zum 60. ('•elmrtstage. Edited by A r p a d W e i x c l g a r t n e r u n d LeO Planiscig. Zurich, Leipzig, V i e n n a : 243-253.

. 1929. Meister und Meisterwerke der Sleinschneidekunst in der italienisrhen Renais­

sance. V i e n n a .

. 1929a. "Zum W e r k d e s P e r i n o d a Vinci." In Pantheon 3: 94-98.

. 1930. " O b e r c i n e g o t i s c h e Georgs-Statue u n d ihre n a c h s t e n V e r w a n d t e n . Ein Beitrag zur K e n n t n i s d e r ostet reiehischen S k u l p t u r im f r u h e n 15. J a h r h u n d e r t . "

In Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien N.F. 4: 121-154.

. 1932. "Die C h a r a k t c r k o p f e d e s Franz Xaver Messerschmidt. Versuch e i n e r historischeu u n d psychologischen D e u l u n g . " In Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien N.F. 6: 169-228.

. 1933. "Ein g e i s t e s k r a n k e r B i l d h a u e r . " In Imago 19: 384-411.

. 1934. ( t o g e t h e r with O t t o Kuiz) Die l.egende vom Kiinstler. Ein geschichtlicher

\ etMiili. V i e n n a .

. 1934a. "Die A r b e i t e n des Gabriel d e G r u p e l l o f u r d e n W i e n e r H o i . " In Jahrbuch der kunsthistorischen Sammlungen in Wien N.F. 8: 205-224.

. 1952. Psychoanalytic Explorations in Art. New York.

Lachnit,

M a c G r e g o r , J o h n M. 1989. The Discovery of the Art oj the Insane. P r i n c e t o n .

Medic us, T h o m a s . 1993. A f t e r w o r d to J u l i u s von Sc hlosser. 'Tote lilirke. Geschichte der Portrdtbildnerei in Wachs. Ein Versuch. Edited by T h o m a s Medicus. Berlin: 123-153.

von Schlosser, Julius. 1934. Die Wiener Schule der Kunstgeschichte. I n n s b r u c k . Schultes, I.othar. 1986. "Dei Meister von G r o s s l o b m i n g u n d die W i e n e r Plastik des

s c h o n e n Slils." In Wiener Jahrbuih fur Kunstgeschichte 39: 1-40.

W e n d l a n d , Ulrike. 1999. "Ernst Kris." In Hiogra/ihisches Handbuch deutschs/irachiger Kunslhistoriker im Exil. Eelten und Werk der unlet dem NalionaLsozialismus verfolglen und uerlriebenen Wissenschafller. Vol. 1. Munc h e n : 387-392.

W i t t e n b e r g e r , G e r h a r d . 1995. Das 'C.eheime Komilee' Sigmund Ereuds:

Institutionali.simingsfirozesse in der 'Psychoanalytischen Hewegung' zwischen 1912 und 1927. T u b i n g e n .

UB Freiburg I. Br.