Early Christian & Byzantine Art: A&i

Rating:
Summary: A good survey book on 12 centuries of Byzantine art
Review: Like another reviewer, I also had this book for a course on Byzantine art. For the most part, Lowden's book is a "survey" in the fullest sense of the word: on average, he only spends a paragraph or two on a particular monument, focusing primarily on style and iconography for icon panels, mosaics, architecture, and "minor arts" (always a dilemma when writing a survey book--quantity of material versus level of depth in one's discussion). He also follows the traditional chronological framework of discussing Early Christian/Byzantine art: from the catacombs and the reign of Constantine, to the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks in 1453.
Having said this, Lowden's book stands out among other surveys for many reasons. Although too numerous for the length of this review, among such strengths are his extensive discussions of Byzantine manuscripts (Lowden's area of scholarly interest), including a chapter on production and reception. He also devotes some attention to the factors surrounding the rise of Iconoclasm, and subsequent artistic production after the iconophiles had "triumphed" over this era of the destruction of figural imagery.
Although a handful of other Byzantine art surveys have been published since Lowden's book (some good, some bad), I feel that this ranks within a small, high-quality group of studies on Byzantine art.

Rating:
Summary: A good survey book on 12 centuries of Byzantine art
Review: Like another reviewer, I also had this book for a course on Byzantine art. For the most part, Lowden's book is a "survey" in the fullest sense of the word: on average, he only spends a paragraph or two on a particular monument, focusing primarily on style and iconography for icon panels, mosaics, architecture, and "minor arts" (always a dilemma when writing a survey book--quantity of material versus level of depth in one's discussion). He also follows the traditional chronological framework of discussing Early Christian/Byzantine art: from the catacombs and the reign of Constantine, to the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks in 1453.
Having said this, Lowden's book stands out among other surveys for many reasons. Although too numerous for the length of this review, among such strengths are his extensive discussions of Byzantine manuscripts (Lowden's area of scholarly interest), including a chapter on production and reception. He also devotes some attention to the factors surrounding the rise of Iconoclasm, and subsequent artistic production after the iconophiles had "triumphed" over this era of the destruction of figural imagery.
Although a handful of other Byzantine art surveys have been published since Lowden's book (some good, some bad), I feel that this ranks within a small, high-quality group of studies on Byzantine art.

Rating:
Summary: A good survey book on 12 centuries of Byzantine art
Review: Like another reviewer, I also had this book for a course on Byzantine art. For the most part, Lowden's book is a "survey" in the fullest sense of the word: on average, he only spends a paragraph or two on a particular monument, focusing primarily on style and iconography for icon panels, mosaics, architecture, and "minor arts" (always a dilemma when writing a survey book--quantity of material versus level of depth in one's discussion). He also follows the traditional chronological framework of discussing Early Christian/Byzantine art: from the catacombs and the reign of Constantine, to the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks in 1453.
Having said this, Lowden's book stands out among other surveys for many reasons. Although too numerous for the length of this review, among such strengths are his extensive discussions of Byzantine manuscripts (Lowden's area of scholarly interest), including a chapter on production and reception. He also devotes some attention to the factors surrounding the rise of Iconoclasm, and subsequent artistic production after the iconophiles had "triumphed" over this era of the destruction of figural imagery.
Although a handful of other Byzantine art surveys have been published since Lowden's book (some good, some bad), I feel that this ranks within a small, high-quality group of studies on Byzantine art.

Rating:
Summary: helpful for the fledgling byzantine scholar
Review: This book was one of my textbooks for a Byzantine art class in college. The pictures are beautifully reproduced and well-presented and the typeface is bold and easy on myopic eyes. The text may seem a bit bland to the well-educated byzantine scholar, but it was a great book for becoming acquainted with one of the richest periods in the history of art. Concisely written, Lowden's book provides the insight and joyful curiosity of an engaged scholar who obviously enjoyed writing the book. That said, I highly recommend this book.

Rating:
Summary: Art Without Ideas?
Review: This is a frustrating book. Graphically, with its numerous vivid, full-color photographs, it is quite striking. Textually, though not poorly written, per se, it is bland. Furthermore, though Lowden (mercifully) dispenses with jargon, he does pay lip service to one of the most recent academic trends in art history: reception theory. I really wish he wouldn't have. Even though surveys are seldom ground-breaking, Lowden's ideas particularly strike me as ones that are not his own. The only area of Byzantine art about which he does seem to know more than most - illuminated manuscripts - gets more coverage than it probably deserves. Then again, Lowden is described as an illuminated manuscript expert on the dust jacket of the book, so perhaps his indulgence is understandable. In short, David Talbot Rice's "Art of the Byzantine Era" still stands in my mind as a better-written and more enduring short survey of Byzantine and early Christian art. Lowden's work is much better graphically, but he lacks Rice's flair and ability to express his enthusiasm for his subject.

Rating:
Summary: Art Without Ideas?
Review: This is a frustrating book. Graphically, with its numerous vivid, full-color photographs, it is quite striking. Textually, though not poorly written, per se, it is bland. Furthermore, though Lowden (mercifully) dispenses with jargon, he does pay lip service to one of the most recent academic trends in art history: reception theory. I really wish he wouldn't have. Even though surveys are seldom ground-breaking, Lowden's ideas particularly strike me as ones that are not his own. The only area of Byzantine art about which he does seem to know more than most - illuminated manuscripts - gets more coverage than it probably deserves. Then again, Lowden is described as an illuminated manuscript expert on the dust jacket of the book, so perhaps his indulgence is understandable. In short, David Talbot Rice's "Art of the Byzantine Era" still stands in my mind as a better-written and more enduring short survey of Byzantine and early Christian art. Lowden's work is much better graphically, but he lacks Rice's flair and ability to express his enthusiasm for his subject.