APA 6th Edition Ivančević, R. (1988). Sto godina predavanja: problem kontiuiteta, tradicije i negacije baštine. Peristil, 31-32 (1), 9-19. Retrieved from https://hrcak.srce.hr/151896
MLA 8th Edition Ivančević, Radovan. "Sto godina predavanja: problem kontiuiteta, tradicije i negacije baštine." Peristil, vol. 31-32, no. 1, 1988, pp. 9-19. https://hrcak.srce.hr/151896. Accessed 5 Jun. 2020.
Chicago 17th Edition Ivančević, Radovan. "Sto godina predavanja: problem kontiuiteta, tradicije i negacije baštine." Peristil 31-32, no. 1 (1988): 9-19. https://hrcak.srce.hr/151896
Harvard Ivančević, R. (1988). 'Sto godina predavanja: problem kontiuiteta, tradicije i negacije baštine', Peristil, 31-32(1), pp. 9-19. Available at: https://hrcak.srce.hr/151896 (Accessed 05 June 2020)
Vancouver Ivančević R. Sto godina predavanja: problem kontiuiteta, tradicije i negacije baštine. Peristil [Internet]. 1988 [cited 2020 June 05];31-32(1):9-19. Available from: https://hrcak.srce.hr/151896
IEEE R. Ivančević, "Sto godina predavanja: problem kontiuiteta, tradicije i negacije baštine", Peristil, vol.31-32, no. 1, pp. 9-19, 1988. [Online]. Available: https://hrcak.srce.hr/151896. [Accessed: 05 June 2020]
Abstracts History does not exist. There were only events in space and time that have left some traces behind. Neither does history of exist. There are only particular works of art made in certain time and space that become (or remain) monuments (and works of art) by designation of their contemporaries and subsequent generations; especially, by the interpretation of art historians actually lies: the fate of art legacy depends on us, on our respect or denial of cultural tradition, and on the maintenance or destruction of monuments.
The question of art historical interpretation of the 1880 — 1980 period appears to be even more responsible and delicate, since we are involved in live processes that are still under way, within the still current industrial epoch. Interpretation and evaluation of the monuments, phenomena and processes should therefore include in the fields of theory of art, interpretation of the work of art, protection of monuments, cultural legacy and environment, and education by and for art.
All these questions and fields are interwoven and actually linked together making an inseparable entity. As any theory, if scientifically based, should start from and be checked in practice, all our theory and practice appear to spring from and merge into the works of art. Interpretation presents the basic problem of the history of art. There is a continuous need of re-interpretation of the works of art, to distinguish thus between their real individual integrity, and various dogmas and derived criteria that have accumulated with time, frequently imposing a monument and preventing any true evaluation.
The author’s theoretical hypotheses are made and checked by critical interpretation of practice and actual fate of the monuments of art in Croatia (e.g. Salona, Pula, Vis), sociological analysis of the phenomenon of urbanization of the provinces and rustification of the capital (e.g. Karlovac, Osijek, Varaždin, Koprivnica, etc. in relation to Zagreb), culturological analysis of frustrating results of the “directed education system” and elimination of the lectures on the history of art and culture from the secondary school program.