mr e BUT HISTSRH: CSflTEflTS. DISEMITEIITS. ASSOCIATION OF ART HISTORIANS QRT & ORT HISTQRU: AAH a CMTEflTS. DISCMTEnTS. ASSOCIATION OF ART HISTORIANS II HnLCSMTEflTS. UNrVIKSITT o* LEEDS Picture on the front cover: Art & Language, Drawing for 'V.I. Lenin' by V. Charangovitch (1970) in the style of Jackson Pollock, 1980, Private Collection, Courtesy of Art & Language Designed by roomfordesign.co.uk aano annum. csnpeRence S-7 BP ML 3DOG mr e WIT HISTSRHI CSnTEflTS. DISCSflTEnTS. HBLESnTEIITS. PRSSRQHNB ESSK Art & Art History: Contents, Malcontents, Discontents -A Senior Citizen's Welcome came to what was then the Department of Fine Art at the University of Leeds in 1977, along with my friend and some­time collaborator Griselda Pollock. We were appointed by T.J. Clark who managed to get us both, though there was only one job, thanks to the Vice-Chancellor, Lord Edward Boyle, the only minister in Eden's government - he was Economic Secretary to the Treasury - to have resigned over the Anglo­French-Israeli invasion of Egypt in 1956.Terry Atkinson came in 1978, and John Tagg joined us in 1979. I'm still here, along with Griselda. Neither of us expected to be at Leeds thirty years on. Back then art history mattered. It did seem that the discipline was at a decisive moment, perhaps even a turning point. Something was at stake. In 1972 it could be glimpsed in John Berger's Ways of Seeing and Michael Baxandall's Art and Experience in Fifteenth Century Italy, in Kurt Forster's 'Critical Art History or the Transfiguration ofValues', and in the setting up of the Women's Art Caucus at the CAA; in 1973 it was there in Clark's Absolute Bourgeois and couldn't be missed in the prolegomenon to Image of the People, and it was there the fol­lowing year in his essay 'On the Conditions of Artistic Creation'. In 1976 it could be glimpsed, again at the margins of the CAA, in the attempt to get the Caucus for Marxist Art History off the ground and in the papers that emerged from it: for example, Clark's 'Preliminary Arguments: The Work of Art as Ideology', David Kunzle's 'The Parts that Got Left Out of the Donald Duck Book or How Karl Marx Prevailed Over Karl Barks', and O.K. Werckmeister's 'From Marxist to Critical Art History'. In the same year, a radical alliance between artists and art historians, the Artists Meeting for Cultural Change, produced an anti-catalogue to critique the Whitney Museum of American Art's decision to display the collection of Mr and Mrs John D. Rockefeller III as a bicentennial exhibit of Tlircc Centuries of American Art, despite the private character of the collection and that it included work by only one female artist and nothing by black artists. They're just some of the examples that come to mind as I write. Having given myself a few pages in this programme for some preliminaries, I find that I'm trying to negotiate the difficulty of writing what may be expected of me and writing what 1 think is demanded ot the present moment. I don't want to appear sarcastic, teeth gnashing and bitter, far from it, but these days, in the University, I feel very much like that character at the beginning of W G. Sebald's Tlie Rings of Saturn who is troubled by nothing quite so much as the dire responsibility of performing his academic duties, under increasing adverse con­ditions. In the dread fear that I'll write what's deemed not required and, in writing it, compromise myself in the most grievous of ways, I'm not surprised I'm bringing this to the computer screen by taking over the words of others. Sometimes, plagiarism is necessary. Progress implies it. Necessity permits one to appropriate the phrase of an author, squeeze it, make use of its expressions, put an idea sous-rature, modify its meaning while keeping the grain of its voice to structure and texture what one wants to say. Of course, I'm aware I run the risk that what I have to say won't sound too many bells with the younger members of the profession - which is what art history has become, mores the pity - and that they'll take it for the disappointed moaning of someone caught in sentimental rapture of a moment long gone, of a time before they were born or just starting school. I certainly wouldn't want to be looking at the world through their eyes or through the eyes of anyone who thinks that all's fine with art history. Art history does still matter, and not in the ways that the present professionalisation - the institution­alised character, method, conduct and quality - of the disci­pline allows it to matter. Writing this, I'm reminded - how could I have forgotten it? ­that there was, once upon a time, a route into art history from