KudoZ home » English » History

high

English translation: the "mature" or "classic" phase [of that period or style]

Advertisement

Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs
(or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
GLOSSARY ENTRY (DERIVED FROM QUESTION BELOW)
English term or phrase:high [phase of a period or style]
English translation:the "mature" or "classic" phase [of that period or style]
Entered by: Christopher Crockett
Options:
- Contribute to this entry
- Include in personal glossary

11:04 Mar 16, 2008
English to English translations [Non-PRO]
History / names of historical periods
English term or phrase: high
Greetings,

It is important that I acquire an accurate understanding of this term, as used in “high Renaissance”, “high Victorian” etc..

My instinct is that it is used for the purest, most typical part of an age, usually its late middle period when that age is considered really to have come into its own, so that e.g. for Victorian times we would have, in chronological order:
early Victorian
mid Victorian
high Victorian
late Victorian

But is that right? I'm really only guessing. I wonder if there is also “low Renaissance”, “low Victorian” – I mention this as it might be a useful contrast with “high”.

All the best, and many thanks,

Simon
SeiTT
United Kingdom
Local time: 17:08
"mature" or "classic"
Explanation:
Yes, it is (usually) the "middle" period of a "style" --though certainly not in a strictly chronological sense (most "styles" develop comparatively rapidly to their "high" stage, but (depending upon other historical factors, like wars, invasions and such, which are particularly hard on Art) may have quite lengthy "late" periods (think: Egypt).

In Art History the term essentially means the "mature" or "classic" stage of any "Stylistic Sequence" --as apposed to the "archaic," "early," and "late" periods of the given style.

The term is used, for example, to describe the development of the "Gothic" style in both sculpture and architecture:

In the archaic stage (usually called "romanesque" in western medieval architecture) the various elements of the style recognizably appear in embryonic form, though perhaps not in the same relationship to each other which they will have in the later phases of the sequence.

The great Anglo-Norman buildings of the later 11th-early 12th c. like Jumieges, Durham, the ducal abbeys of Caen come to mind.

These various elements become more coherent and better integrated in monuments of the "early" stage (e.g., St. Denis, Senlis, the Noyon transepts, the choir of Paris, in "Gothic" architecture).

The "early" stage is particularly characterized as being one of great variety and experimentation --three or four story elevations, quadripartite or sexpartite rib vaulting, etc.

In the "high" stage we arrive at a kind of "synthesis," both in the *form* of the various elements and (above all) in what might be termed the Conception of the Whole.

Chartres, Bourges, Reims and Amiens cathedrals are the "classic" or "High Gothic" buildings of the "gothic" sequence --in particular, the three storey elevation (main arcade, triforium, clerestory) becomes standard, as does (usually --Bourges is a signficant and spectacular exception) quadripartite vaults and "bar" tracery in the windows (Chartres' "plate" tracery being an exception).

So, yes, the "high" period is (usually) the "middle" one of a "style" --though certainly only only in a relative, rather than a strictly chronological, sense: most "styles" develop comparatively rapidly to their "high" stage, but (depending, as I said, upon other historical factors) may have quite lengthy "late" periods --the "high" being in between. (Think: Egypt, where we have an "archaic" phase lasting several centuries, an "early" period lasting several more, a "high" period of several more centuries yet, and a "late" phase which lasts, literally, a mind-boggling *thousands* of years).

Keep in mind that all these classifications --not just of the "phases" of a "style" but of "styles" themselves-- are Modern "Constructs."

The contemporary culture may not have (and almost always did NOT) seen their own cultural artefacts in the same way, at all.


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day3 hrs (2008-03-17 14:06:11 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Note that my use of the term "stylistic analysis" is taken from the fertile mind of the late George Kubler (esp. in his "The Shape of Time: Remarks on the History of Things," Yale U.P., 1962 et seq.).

Here's Kubler applying the concept to the sequences of Pre-Columbian architecture, which were his own particular specialty:

http://books.google.com/books?id=3y_Gre4QLQkC&pg=PA299&lpg=P...


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day4 hrs (2008-03-17 15:05:46 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

As to "low":

I can't recall the term being used in Art History --or in periodizations which are based, primary, on Art Historical criteria.

There is certainly no "Low Gothic," "Low Renaissance," "Low Baroque," etc. --all those would be "Early NNN."


As far as I know, "Low" is only applied to strictly historical periods or, perhaps, to languages (I *think* that there is a "Low German," but maybe not).

In History we have usages in French which are not, in the main, translated literally into English or German periodizations: the "Bas Empire [Romaine]" is the "Late [or "Spaten"] Empire," the "Bas Moyen Age" the "Early M.A."

The French seem to be thinking "Vertically," the Germanophones "Horizontally."

And even the French are circumspect about applying "Bas" to art historical periods: there is no "Bas gothique" for example, only "Premier art gothique."

I've certainly never seen the "Low M.A.," notwithstanding

http://www.harding.edu/jmfortner/HIST110EXStudyGuide5LMA.htm

(but, I've never heard of harding.edu, or Searcy, Ark., either) --this poor Christian lady is just literally [mis-]translating the French term.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day4 hrs (2008-03-17 15:10:43 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Likewise, this guy

http://www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/ar...

is an perfect (or "High") example of the Dangers of the WWW.

There are too many mistatements of clear Fact on that page for me to count.
Selected response from:

Christopher Crockett
Local time: 12:08
Grading comment
many thanks, an explanation worthy of a real professional
4 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer

Advertisement


Summary of answers provided
4 +3culmination
Jay Whitten
5"mature" or "classic"
Christopher Crockett


  

Answers


10 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +3
culmination


Explanation:
"Purest," as you mentioned, seems pretty close.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_Renaissance

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 14 mins (2008-03-16 11:19:10 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Here is an example of a contrast between "high" and "low"

http://www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/ar...

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 18 mins (2008-03-16 11:22:54 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

One more link (states that "high" = "late" and "low" = "early"):

http://www.harding.edu/jmfortner/HIST110EXStudyGuide5LMA.htm

Jay Whitten
Russian Federation
Local time: 19:08
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  salavat
9 mins
  -> thanks!

agree  Vicky Nash: The period which is most recognisable as... (Victorian), i.e. when it was at its best.
7 hrs
  -> thanks!

agree  Gary D
12 hrs
  -> thanks!

neutral  Christopher Crockett: Sorry, James, but this is not the sense in which the term is used by Art Historians, in part because "culmination" implies a value judgement, while "high," "mature," or "classic" (although certainly interpretative in nature) do not. See my explanation.
1 day2 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

1 day2 hrs   confidence: Answerer confidence 5/5
"mature" or "classic"


Explanation:
Yes, it is (usually) the "middle" period of a "style" --though certainly not in a strictly chronological sense (most "styles" develop comparatively rapidly to their "high" stage, but (depending upon other historical factors, like wars, invasions and such, which are particularly hard on Art) may have quite lengthy "late" periods (think: Egypt).

In Art History the term essentially means the "mature" or "classic" stage of any "Stylistic Sequence" --as apposed to the "archaic," "early," and "late" periods of the given style.

The term is used, for example, to describe the development of the "Gothic" style in both sculpture and architecture:

In the archaic stage (usually called "romanesque" in western medieval architecture) the various elements of the style recognizably appear in embryonic form, though perhaps not in the same relationship to each other which they will have in the later phases of the sequence.

The great Anglo-Norman buildings of the later 11th-early 12th c. like Jumieges, Durham, the ducal abbeys of Caen come to mind.

These various elements become more coherent and better integrated in monuments of the "early" stage (e.g., St. Denis, Senlis, the Noyon transepts, the choir of Paris, in "Gothic" architecture).

The "early" stage is particularly characterized as being one of great variety and experimentation --three or four story elevations, quadripartite or sexpartite rib vaulting, etc.

In the "high" stage we arrive at a kind of "synthesis," both in the *form* of the various elements and (above all) in what might be termed the Conception of the Whole.

Chartres, Bourges, Reims and Amiens cathedrals are the "classic" or "High Gothic" buildings of the "gothic" sequence --in particular, the three storey elevation (main arcade, triforium, clerestory) becomes standard, as does (usually --Bourges is a signficant and spectacular exception) quadripartite vaults and "bar" tracery in the windows (Chartres' "plate" tracery being an exception).

So, yes, the "high" period is (usually) the "middle" one of a "style" --though certainly only only in a relative, rather than a strictly chronological, sense: most "styles" develop comparatively rapidly to their "high" stage, but (depending, as I said, upon other historical factors) may have quite lengthy "late" periods --the "high" being in between. (Think: Egypt, where we have an "archaic" phase lasting several centuries, an "early" period lasting several more, a "high" period of several more centuries yet, and a "late" phase which lasts, literally, a mind-boggling *thousands* of years).

Keep in mind that all these classifications --not just of the "phases" of a "style" but of "styles" themselves-- are Modern "Constructs."

The contemporary culture may not have (and almost always did NOT) seen their own cultural artefacts in the same way, at all.


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day3 hrs (2008-03-17 14:06:11 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Note that my use of the term "stylistic analysis" is taken from the fertile mind of the late George Kubler (esp. in his "The Shape of Time: Remarks on the History of Things," Yale U.P., 1962 et seq.).

Here's Kubler applying the concept to the sequences of Pre-Columbian architecture, which were his own particular specialty:

http://books.google.com/books?id=3y_Gre4QLQkC&pg=PA299&lpg=P...


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day4 hrs (2008-03-17 15:05:46 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

As to "low":

I can't recall the term being used in Art History --or in periodizations which are based, primary, on Art Historical criteria.

There is certainly no "Low Gothic," "Low Renaissance," "Low Baroque," etc. --all those would be "Early NNN."


As far as I know, "Low" is only applied to strictly historical periods or, perhaps, to languages (I *think* that there is a "Low German," but maybe not).

In History we have usages in French which are not, in the main, translated literally into English or German periodizations: the "Bas Empire [Romaine]" is the "Late [or "Spaten"] Empire," the "Bas Moyen Age" the "Early M.A."

The French seem to be thinking "Vertically," the Germanophones "Horizontally."

And even the French are circumspect about applying "Bas" to art historical periods: there is no "Bas gothique" for example, only "Premier art gothique."

I've certainly never seen the "Low M.A.," notwithstanding

http://www.harding.edu/jmfortner/HIST110EXStudyGuide5LMA.htm

(but, I've never heard of harding.edu, or Searcy, Ark., either) --this poor Christian lady is just literally [mis-]translating the French term.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day4 hrs (2008-03-17 15:10:43 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Likewise, this guy

http://www.catholicintl.com/epologetics/articles/pastoral/ar...

is an perfect (or "High") example of the Dangers of the WWW.

There are too many mistatements of clear Fact on that page for me to count.

Christopher Crockett
Local time: 12:08
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Native in EnglishEnglish
PRO pts in category: 8
Grading comment
many thanks, an explanation worthy of a real professional
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Return to KudoZ list


Changes made by editors
Mar 18, 2008 - Changes made by Christopher Crockett:
Created KOG entryKudoZ term » KOG term


KudoZ™ translation help
The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.



See also:



Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search