藝術史的書寫往往仰賴一種普遍的風格辨識取得時間感和歷史分類，因此藝術作品長期以來被視為物件，按照風格、地域、年代被放置在所屬的類別和框架，然而當代藝術的出現打破了過往既定認知的線性史觀，我們面對的是一個沒有特定風格，同時時序混亂的時代。藝術史學家莫克西認為現代主義線性時間的停止提供的是一個機會，讓藝術史學家回過頭審視過往的歷史書寫方式，重新檢視長期主導過去，同時也持續影響現在的權威典範，莫克西認為，既然現代主義的時間是多元的，在不同地理區域有不同快慢的時間流逝，那麼歷史書寫也不應該只有單純存在一種過去、現在、未來的解釋方法。

莫克西進一步指出，圖像轉向的趨勢是當今藝術史學家必須面對的問題，我們身處在圖像的時代，過去以文字為主片面地將圖像馴服在不同歷史時間段的方式有所限制，莫克西提出時代錯置理論，加以闡釋圖像本身作為活生生的生命體，具有主動邀請觀者感受、詮釋的力量，因此面對圖像，歷史學家需要更多的解釋方法，在意識到異時性與時代錯置這兩點之後，歷史才能進一步的書寫下去，也才能更真實的反應當代多元發展的全球藝術表現。

History writing greatly relies on a general artistic style in order to periodize and categorize art. Therefore, artwork has long been categorized into its’ separate time frame based on styles, locations and years accordingly. Contemporary art not only breaks free of the linear historical progress, but also lacks a specific art style, history writing is then confronted with the problem of time confusion. Historian Keith Moxey indicates that the cessation of modernism's linear time provides us with an opportunity to ponder about the Western canonical accounts of the recent past, as well as of the present. Moxey points out that if modernism's time is multiple, its time flows at different speeds in different situations and geographical regions, then history writing should not confine itself to a single interpretation of the past, present and future.

Moxey further indicates that historians should also respond to the trend of pictorial turn. We are currently living in the era of images, the old approach of using words to define and to frame different art images into varies categories is no longer valid or sufficient. Moxey raises the concept of anachronism to point out that image is a living actor with the capability to incite feelings and to invite interpretations. Therefore, historians should make use of all the possible approaches to try to decipher images, by recognizing heterochrony and anachronism these two distinct characteristics, history writing may better reflects various and multiple artistic forms all over the world.

王珮倫，〈全球藝術史的再思考：以Moxey的史觀為主要討論對象〉，《臺灣美術學刊》，123期（2022.11），頁22-41。
汪民安，《文化研究關鍵詞》，臺北市：城邦文化，2013。
米歇爾（W.J.T. Mitchell），《形象科學》，石武耕譯，臺北市：馬可孛
羅文化，2020。
亞瑟．丹托（Arthur C. Danto），《在藝術終結之後：當代藝術與歷史藩籬》，林雅琪、鄭惠雯譯，臺北市：麥田出版社，2010。
李歐塔（Jean-François Lyotard），《後現代狀態：關於知識的報告》，車槿山譯，臺北市：五南出版社，2012。
李立鈞，〈星空中的黑暗：阿比．瓦堡的「記憶─圖輯」〉，《藝術觀點ACT》，61期（2015.1），頁38-45。
高千惠，《第三翅膀：藝術觀念及其不滿》，臺北市：典藏藝術，2014。
陳懷恩，〈藝術書寫與藝術史書寫〉，《白沙人文社會學報》，1期（2002.1），頁16-20。
陳春燕，〈時間與他者：後殖民全球化的當下〉，《英美文學評論》，13期（2008.10），頁119-155。
黃瑞祺，〈現代性的省察〉，《臺灣社會期刊》，19期（1996.19），頁177-191。
理查．雄恩（Richard Shone）、約翰-保羅．史多納（John-Paul Stonard），《藝術史學的世界觀：從宮布利西與葛林柏格到阿爾珀斯及克勞斯》，王聖智譯，臺北市：典藏藝術家庭，2017。
威廉．麥克尼爾（William H. McNeill），《西方的興起：人類共同體史》，孫嶽、郭方、李永斌譯，臺北市：中信出版社，2018。
貢布里希（E. H. Gombrich），《瓦爾堡思想傳記》，李本正譯，北京：商務印書館，2020。
暮澤剛巳，《當代藝術關鍵詞》，蔡青雯譯，臺北市：城邦出版，2017。
Adam, Barbara. Timescapes of Modernity. London: Routledge, 1998.
Ankersmit, Frank. Sublime Historical Experience. Stanford : Stanford University Press, 2005.
Belting, Hans. An Anthropology of Images: Picture, Medium, Body. Princeton :Princeton University Press, 2014.
Bredekamp, Horst. Darwin's Corals: A New Model of Evolution and the Tradition of Natural History. Boston: De Gruyter, 2019.
Bachmann-Medick, Doris. Cultural Turns : New Orientations in the Study of Culture. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter, 2016.
Bryson, Norman, et al. eds. Visual Culture: Images and Interpretations. Connecticut: University Press of New England for Wesleyan University Press, 1994.
Burke, Peter. "Art and History, 1969–2019." Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. 50, No. 2 (2020): 567-586.
Curtis, Neal. “‘As If’: Situating The Pictorial Turn.” Culture, Theory and Critique, Vol. 50, No. 2-3 (2009): 95–101.
Danto, Arthur C. After the End of Art: Contemporary Art and the Pale of History. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2014.
Didi-Huberman, Georges. Confronting Images: Questioning the Ends of a Certain History of Art. Pennsylvania :The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2005.
de Vries, Joyce, “Visual Time: The Image in History by Keith Moxey.” The Sixteenth Century Journal, Vol. 45, No. 2 (2014): 454-455.
Elkins, James et al. eds. Art and Globalization. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State。University Press, 2010.
Elkins, James. “Art History and Images That Are Not Art.” The Art Bulletin, Vol. 77, No. 4 (1995): 553-571.
Eaton, Natasha. “Anachronism's Mimetic Magic.” Art History, Vol. 39 (2016): 1014-1018.
Edgerton, Samuel Y. The Renaissance Artist as Quantifier. Cambridge: Academic Press, 1980.
Fishburne, James. “Review of Visual Time: The Image in History, by Keith. Moxey.” A Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies, Vol. 45 (2014): 291-293.
Greenberg, Clement. Art and Culture. Boston: Beacon Press, 1965.
Gumbrecht, Hans Ulrich. Production of Presence: What Meaning Cannot Convey. Stanford University Press, 2004.
Hassan, Robert. “Globalization and the Temporal Turn: Recent Trends and Issues in Time Studies.” The Korean Journal of Policy Studies, Vol. 25, No. 2 (2010): 83-102.
Heuer, Christopher P. “Review of Visual Time: The Image in History, by Keith. Moxey.” Renaissance Quarterly, Vol. 67, No. 3 (2014): 967-968.
Inaga, Shigemi. "The Impossible Avant-Garde in Japan: Does the Avant-Garde Exist in the Third World? Japan's Example: A Borderline Case of Misunderstanding in Aesthetic Intercultural Exchange." Comparative and General Literature 41 (1993): 68-75.
Kim, Seung Jung. “When Is Art?” Art in America, No.2 (Feb. 2014): 43–45.
Krieger, Murray. Ekphrasis: the Illusion of the Natural Sign. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992.
Levy, J. R. Modernization and the structure of societies: The Organisational Contexts of Societies. Transaction Pub, 1996.
Latour, Bruno. “Visualization and Cognition: Drawing Things Together” JAI Press, Vol. 6, (1986): 1-40.
May, Jon., and Nigel, Thrift. Timespace: Geographies of temporalilty. London: Routledge, 2003.
Mack, Peter. Michael Baxandall, Vision and the Work of Words. London: Routledge, 2018.
Moxey, Keith. The Practice of Theory: Poststructuralism, Cultural Politics, and Art History. New York: Cornell University Press, 1994.
Moxey, Keith. Visual time: The image in history. Durham: Duke University Press, 2013.
Moxey, Keith. “Motivating History.” Art Bulletin, Vol. 77 (1995): 392-401.
Moxey, Keith. “Visual Studies and the Iconic Turn.” Journal of Visual Culture, Vol. 7, No.2 (Aug. 2008): 131–146.
Mazlish, Bruce. “Comparing Global History to World History.” The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, Vol. 28, No. 3 (1998) : pp. 385-395.
Mitchell, W. J.T. What Do Pictures Want?: The Lives and Loves of Images. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010.
Mitchell, W. J.T. “Showing Seeing: A Critique of Visual Culture.” Journal of Visual Culture, Vol. 1, No. 2 (2002): 165–181.
Mitchell, W. J.T. Picture theory: Essays on verbal and visual。representation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994.
Rosa, Hartmut. High-Speed Society: Social Acceleration, Power, and Modernity. USA: Penn State University Press, 2008.
Sedlmayr, Hans. “Bruegel’s Macchia”(1934), translated by Frederic Schwartz, edited by Christopher Wood. The Vienna School Reader: Politics and Art Historical Method in the 1930s. New York: Zone Books, 2000.
Sachs, Jeffrey D.. The Ages of Globalization: Geography, Technology, and Institutions. West Sussex: Columbia University Press, 2020.
Smick, Rebekah. “Vusual Time: The Image in History by Keith Moxey.” Renaissance and Reformation, Vol. 38, No. 4 (2015): 210–213.
Vasari, Giorgio. Lives of the Artists. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008.
Vellodi, Kamini. “A Timely Collection.” Journal of Art Historiography, Vol. 20 (2019): 01-10.
Venuti, Lawrence. “Ekphrasis, Translation, Critique.” Art in Translation, Vol. 2, No. 2 (2010): 131-152.
Wolfflin, Heinrich. Principles of Art History: The Problem of the Development of Style in Early Modern Art. Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, 2015.
Zorach, Rebecca. “Treasuries of Loss.” Oxford Art Journal, Vol. 39, No. 3 (Oct. 2016): pp. 495-