REFERENCES

Aiken, H. D.1955. The aesthetic relevance of artist's intentions. Journal of Philosophy52:742–53.

Baxandall, M.1985. Patterns of intention: On the historical explanation of pictures. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Beck, J.1993. Art restoration: The culture, the business and the scandal. New York: Norton.

Brandi, C.1949. The cleaning of pictures in relation to patina, varnish, and glazes. Burlington Magazine91:183–88.

Broude, N.1991. Science and the arts. In Impressionism, a feminist reading. New York: Rizzoli. 114–23.

Burlington Magazine. 1947. Editorial: The problem of cleaning. Burlington Magazine89:329–30.

Carrier, D.1985. Art and its preservation. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism43:291–300.

Coremans, P.1948. The recent cleaning of Rubens' Chapeau de Paille. Burlington Magazine90:257–61.

Davenport, K.1995. Impossible liberties: Contemporary artists on the life of their work over time. Art Journal54(2):40–52.

Davies, M.1972. Rogier van der Weyden. London: Phaidon.

Delacroix, E.1948. Journal of Eug�ne Delacroix, trans. W. Pach. New York: Crown Publishers.

Dolce, L. [1577] 1970. Aretin: A dialog on painting, trans. W. Brown. Menston, Yorkshire: Scolar Press.

Fiedler, I.1984. Materials used in Seurat's La Grande Jatte including color changes and notes on the evolution of the artist's palette. AIC preprints, American Institute for Conservation 12th Annual Meeting, Los Angeles. Washington, D.C.: AIC. 43–51.

Gadamer, H.-G.1975. The question of truth as it emerges in the experience of art. In Truth and method, ed. and trans. W.Glen-Dopel. London: Sheed and Ward. 1–45.

Garland, P. S.1983. Joseph Albers: His paintings, their materials, technique and treatment. Journal of the American Institute for Conservation22:22–67.

Glueck, G.1980. The great conservation debate. Portfolio2(2):44–51.

Gombrich, E.1962. Dark varnishes, variations on a theme from Pliny. Burlington Magazine104:51–55.

Gombrich, E.1963. Controversial methods and methods of controversy. Burlington Magazine105:90–93.

Hedley, G.1985. On humanism, aesthetics and the cleaning of paintings. Lecture series presented at the Canadian Conservation Institute. Ottawa.

Hochfield, S.1976. Conservation: The need is urgent. Art News75(2):26–33.

Hochfield, S.1978. The great National Gallery cleaning controversy. Art News77(8):58–61.

Hungerland, I. C.1955. The concept of intention in art criticism. Journal of Philosophy52:733–42.

Juhl, P. D.1980. Interpretation: An essay in the philosophy of literary criticism. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 45–195.

Kris, E.1952. The image of the artist. In Psychoanalytic explorations in art. New York: International Universities Press. 64–68.

Kuhns, R.1960. Criticism and the problem of intention. Journal of Philosophy57:5–23.

Kurz, O.1962. Varnishes, tinted varnishes and patina. Burlington Magazine104:56–59.

Kurz, O.1963. Time the painter. Burlington Magazine105:94–97.

Lyas, C.1983. Anything goes: The intentional fallacy revisited. British Journal of Aesthetics23:291–305.

MacLaren, N., and A.Werner. 1950. Some factual observations about varnishes and glazes. Burlington Magazine92:189–92.

Mancusi-Ungaro, C. C.1981. Preliminary studies for the conservation of the Rothko chapel paintings: An investigative approach. AIC preprints, American Institute for Conservation 9th Annual Meeting, Philadelphia. Washington, D.C.: AIC. 109–13.

Margolis, J. Z.1980. The intention of the artist. In Art and philosophy. Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities Press. 165–89.

McGill, D.1987. A master at touching up the masters. New York Times, October 4, 35–40.

Panofsky, E. [1927] 1991. Perspective as symbolic form, trans. C. S. Wood. New York: Zone Books.

Rees-Jones, S.1962. Science and the art of picture cleaning. Burlington Magazine104:60–62.

Ricoeur, P.1981. The hermeneutical function of distanciation. In Hermeneutics and the social sciences, ed. and trans. J. B.Thompson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 131–44.

Ruhemann, H.1961. Leonardo's use of sfumato. British Journal of Aesthetics1:231–37.

Ruhemann, H.1963. The training of restorers. In Recent advances in conservation, ed.G.Thomson. London: Butterworths. 202–5.

Stout, G. L.1948. The care of pictures. New York: Columbia University Press.

Svoboda, S. A., and C. A.VanVooren, 1989. An investigation into Albert Pinkham Ryder's painting materials and techniques with additional research on forgeries. AIC Paintings Specialty Group postprints, American Institute for Conservation 17th Annual Meeting, Cincinnati. Washington, D.C.: AIC. 36–50.

Tompkins, C.1987. Profiles. New Yorker 63 (March 16):44–70.

Walden, S.1985. The ravaged image. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Weil, P.1984. “Visually illiterate” and “Historically ignorant”: The need to re-examine art conservation's humanistic foundations.AIC preprints, American Institute for Conservation 12th Annual Meeting, Los Angeles. Washington, D.C.: AIC. 86–93.

Wheelock, A.1977. De Geschiedenis en Bekoring van “De Molen.”De Kroniek van het Rembrandthuis29(1):20–32.

Wimsatt, W. K., and M.Beardsley.1946. The intentional fallacy. Sewanee Review54:468–88.

Wyer, E. B.1988. Flaky art, modern masterpieces are crumbling. New York21(January 25):42–48.

ADDITIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY ON ARTISTS' INTENTIONS

Anscombe, G.E.M.1963. Intention. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.

Beardsley, M.1968. Textual meaning and authorial meaning. Genre1:169–81.

Bass, W.1989. Art and the unintended. British Journal of Aesthetics29:147–53.

Best, D.1981. Intentionality and art. Philosophy56:349–63.

Bratman, M.1981. Intention and means-end reasoning. Philosophical Review90:252–56.

Bratman, M.1984. Two faces of intention. Philosophical Review93:375–405.

Cioffi, F.1965. Intention and interpretation in criticism. In Collected papers in aesthetics, ed.C.Barrett.Oxford: Cambridge University Press. 165–75.

Davies, S.1982. Aesthetic Relevance of Author's and Painter's Intentions. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism41:65–76.

Davies, S.1987. A note on Feagin on interpreting art intentionalistically. British Journal of Aesthetics27:178–80.

Dickie, G.1968. Meaning and intention. Genre1:182–89.

Dipert, R. R.1986. Art, artifacts, and regarded intentions. American Philosophical Quarterly23:401–8.

Donnell-Kotrozo, C.1980. The intentional fallacy: An applied reappraisal. British Journal of Aesthetics20:356–65.

Ellis, A. J.1974. Intention and interpretation in literature. British Journal of Aesthetics14:315–25.

Feagin, S. L.1982. On defining and interpreting art intentionalistically. British Journal of Aesthetics22:65–77.

Fulton, J. A.1977. Persons as causes. International Philosophical Quarterly17:179–84.

Gill, S. P.1986. The paradox of prediction. Daedalus115:17–48.

Hirsch, E. D., Jr. 1983. Past intentions and present meanings. Essays in Criticism33:79–98.

Hospers, J.1986. Artistic creativity. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism43:243–55.

Iser, W.1984. The interplay between creation and interpretation. New Literary History15:387–95.

Kemp, J.1964. The work of art and the artist's intentions. British Journal of Aesthetics4:146–54.

Lang, B.1974. The intentional fallacy revisited. British Journal of Aesthetics14:306–14.

Lowenberg, I.1974. Intentions, the speaker and the artist. British Journal of Aesthetics15:40–49.

Margolis, J.1980. Trouble with homunculus theories. Philosophical Science47:244–59.

Nathan, D. O.1982. Irony and the artist's intentions. British Journal of Aesthetics22:245–56.

Olsen, S. H.1973. Authorial intention. British Journal of Aesthetics13:219–31.

Olsen, S. H.1975. Interpretation and intention. British Journal of Aesthetics17:210–18.

Parry, R. D.1974. Agent's knowledge of his own actions. Personalist55:44–52.

Roskill, M.1977. On the “intention” and “meaning” of works of art. British Journal of Aesthetics17:99–110.

Saville, A.1972. The place of intention in the concept of art. In Aesthetics, ed.H.Osborne. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 158–76

Searle, J. R.1979. What is an intentional state?Mind88:74–92.

Searle, J. R.1981. Intentionality and method. Journal of Philosophy78:720–33.

Sirridge, M.1978. Artistic intention and critical prerogative. British Journal of Aesthetics18:137–54.

Stich, S. P.1984. Relativism, rationality and the limits of intentional description. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly65:211–35.

Summers, D.1986. Intentions in the history of art. New Literary History17:305–49.

Vivas, E.1955. Mr. Wimsatt on the theory of literature. Comparative Literature7:344–61.

Weil, V. M.1980. Intentional and mechanistic explanations. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research40:459–73.

Wollheim, R.1984. Art, interpretation and the creative process. New Literary History23:246–51.

Zumbach, C.1984. Artistic functions and the intentional fallacy. American Philosophical Quarterly21:147–56.

AUTHOR INFORMATION

STEVEN W. DYKSTRA received a B.A. in liberal arts from Bucknell University in 1973. He was privately trained in paintings conservation at the Western Center for the Conservation of Fine Art and Olin Conservation. In 1984–85 he was a national Museum Act master apprentice intern in the conservation department of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. In 1988 he received an M.A. in individualized studies from the George Washington University for research in the history, philosophy, and anthropology of art resulting in a master's paper entitled, “Understanding Controversy in Fine Arts Conservation.” He works as a museum specialist/registrar in the Art in Embassies Program, U.S. Department of State, and maintains a private practice in paintings conservation in Washington, D.C. Address: 1524 Kingman Place, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005-3709.