{"word_count": 302, "character_count": 1953}
Art History Supplement, Issue 2.5, September 2012,Submission deadline August 15, 2012&#160;Patronage (or matronage) studies had changed the route of art history under a Marxist view of art and its commodities; public had also emerged from a branch of Marxist and reception studies. While not a few art historians have voted themselves and their art histories into the study of how many diverse art histories existed under the notion of public, either first public or any other different publics in history.&#160;In this particular issue, papers are sought, using the paradigm of sculpture, considering (m)patron as public – as part of public. A (m)patron is someone who is responsible for the final stylistic or iconographical outcome within a medieval, renaissance or early modern artwork/artefact under cultural and social stylistic choices, perceived through various archival, and other, documents. The authoritative (or manipulating) voice of the concept of a (m)patron over the result of the artistic activity reveals, of course, not only the voice of that particular individual but also the cultural society one belonged and represents.&#160;But, after the completion of the art order, request or demand, when the artwork/artefact is “shown” to general public or to distinct cultural group of people with their own art histories and art theories, the (m)patron becomes just a part of the general notion of the public; a section within the pie chart entitled “public.” Not only is he / she a (m)patron, he / she is also public. Thereby, he/ she is not an onlooker or just a spectator but also an active viewer free to create any possible, within his/her cultural settings, positive or negative comments – reception or appropriation, others would prefer to say – as any other member of public. The examination of those comments in their art history is particularly encouraged.&#160;For submission guidelines, visit www.arths.org.uk&#160;&#160;&#160;