Divergencies of Perception Divergencies of Perception The Possibilities of Merleau-Pontian Phenomenology in Analyses of Contemporary Art SAARA HACKLIN Aesthetics Department of Philosophy, History, Culture and Art Studies University of Helsinki, Finland Academic dissertation to be publicly discussed, by due permission of the Faculty of Arts at the University of Helsinki in auditorium XIII (Main Building, Unioninkatu 34), on the 24th of February, 2012 at 12 o’clock. © 2012 Saara Hacklin ISBN 978-952-10-7605-3 (paperback) ISBN 978-952-10-7606-0 (PDF) Typesetting: Jonne Savolainen Image processing: Hella Pakaslahti http://ethesis.helsinki.fi/ Nord Print Helsinki 2012 In memory of MEM Supervised by: Professor Arto Haapala Faculty of Arts University of Helsinki and Academy Research Fellow, Senior Lecturer Sara Heinämaa Collegium for Advanced Studies University of Helsinki Reviewed by: Professor Véronique M. Fóti Department of Philosophy Pennsylvania State University, USA and Professor Renée van de Vall Department of Literature & Art Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences Maastricht University, The Netherlands Discussed with: Professor Renée van de Vall Department of Literature & Art Faculty of Arts & Social Sciences Maastricht University, The Netherlands Abstract Maurice Merleau-Ponty (1908–1961) has been known as the philoso- pher of painting whose thinking developed through visual arts. His interest in the theory of perception intertwined with the questions concerning the artist’s perception, the experience of an artwork and the possible interpretations of the artwork. For him, aesthetics was not a sub-field of philosophy, and art was not simply a subject matter for the aesthetic experience (of beauty), but a form of thinking. This study proposes an opening for a dialogue between Merleau- Pontian phenomenology and contemporary art. The thesis has a two- fold approach: on the one hand, it examines his phenomenology through certain works of contemporary art, and on the other hand, it presents readings of these artworks through Merleau-Pontian phe- nomenology. My work is a demonstration of a Merleau-Pontian ap- proach to artworks; the goal is both to show the potentiality of a method, but also to engage in the critical task of finding the possible limitations of his approach. The chapters 2–3 lay out the methodological and conceptual points of departure of Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenological approach to per- ception as well as the features that determined his discussion on en- countering art. It presents the principles of phenomenological method and Edmund Husserl’s influence on Merleau-Ponty and also examines the role of the spectator in the phenomenological approach. Merleau- Ponty referred to the experience of perceiving art using the notion of “seeing with” (“voir selon”), and he also stressed a certain correlative reciprocity that he described in “Eye and Mind” (“L’Œil et l’Esprit”, 1961) as the switching of the roles of the visible and the painter. The choice of artworks is motivated by certain restrictions or la- cunae in the phenomenological readings of visual arts as well as by a quest for many-sidedness and a plurality of artistic approaches. The vii viii ABSTRACT examined works include paintings by Tiina Mielonen, a photographic work by Christian Mayer, a film by Douglas Gordon and Philippe Par- reno, and an installation by Monika Sosnowska. These works also carry features that resonate with, and also challenge, the phenomenological approach of Merleau-Ponty. The chapters with case studies (4–7) take up different themes. To- gether with the artworks, the focus is on topics that are central to Merleau-Ponty’s phenomenology, namely space, movement, time, and touch, as well as the question of the other. All of the themes are inter- linked with the examined works of art. However, there are also topics and aspects that reappear in the thesis, for instance, the notion of écart and the question of encountering the other. As Merleau-Ponty argued, the sphere of art has a particular capa- bility to address our being in the world in a manner that is not and cannot be done elsewhere. The thesis presents an interpretation that emphasises the notion of écart, which refers to an experience of diver- gence or dispossession. Éliane Escoubas proposes that “seeing with or along” marks the écart between the object as a thing and as a paint- ing/picture. The thesis also argues that écart includes the constitutive element of all encountering: The sudden dissociation, surprise or rup- ture that is needed in order for a meeting between the spectator and the artwork, or between two persons, to be possible. The écart can be understood as the principle without which the encountering with art is not possible. Further, the thesis suggests that through artworks it is possible to take into consideration the écart, the divergence, that defines our subjectivity. We ourselves are marked by a special form of divergence. Acknowledgements As a student, I chose to study philosophy thinking that eventually it would, so to speak, “cover all”. Luckily, during my undergraduate years I started to doubt my naïve viewpoint. I remember very vividly the moment when my interest in the arts developed into an insight: philos- ophy is both challenged and accompanied by the arts. This epiphany arrived to me through working with contemporary art and I feel that it has affected many of the choices I have made later in life. A doctoral thesis is a result of a long process. First of all, I would like to express my appreciation to my supervisors Professor Arto Haa- pala and Academy Research Fellow, Senior Lecturer Sara Heinämaa for their open-mindedness and unfailing trust in my project: thank you for your insightful comments and questions. I owe a special debt of gratitude to the pre-examiners Professor Véronique M. Fóti and Pro- fessor Renée van de Vall for their valuable and thorough comments that helped me to improve my work. It is evident that this thesis would not exist without intriguing art- works that urged me to challenge my preconceptions on phenomenol- ogy. I would like to express my appreciation to the artists Douglas Gor- don, Christian Mayer, Tiina Mielonen, Philippe Parreno and Monika Sosnowska. I have had the joy of following closely the work of Chris- tian Mayer and Tiina Mielonen, to whom I remain thankful for many intellectually stimulating conversations. As a young philosophy student, I was inspired by Docent Juha Hi- manka’s lectures in phenomenology as well as his encouraging com- ments. Similarly, I feel that for a new doctoral student, Professor Pauline von Bonsdorff’s support, especially the invitation to join Cor- pus — The Bodily Turn network, was important. Dr. Martta Heikkilä has been my close colleague, who immediately made me feel welcome at Aesthetics. She has always been ready to ix x ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS comment on and discuss both academic and non-academic issues, phi- losophy of art and the arts, never pressuring me to return the books that I borrowed from her excellent collection of French contemporary philosophy. My friendship with Dr. Erika Ruonakoski started on the first conference trip abroad. After that we have shared many memo- rable moments in conferences as well as in cafés, where her knowledge of Merleau-Ponty and her passion for discussing the arts has never ceased to impress me. Despite her own busy timetable she also took the time to read through and comment on my manuscript at a point where outside perspective seemed to be the only way out. As a doctoral student I have had the opportunity to attend both Heinämaa’s and Haapala’s seminars. From these circles I am espe- cially in debt to fellow PhD students Kaisa Heinlahti and Tuukka Perhoniemi with whom I shared the first excitement and puzzlement of doctoral studies, as well as Dr. Jussi Backman, who invited me to Swedish–Finnish Phenomenological Workshops. Also, I wish to give my thanks to Juho Hotanen, Dr. Virpi Lehtinen, University Lecturer Su- sanna Lindberg, Timo Miettinen, Simo Pulkkinen, Dr. Joona Taipale, Hermanni Yli-Tepsa as well as Docent Tua Korhonen, from whom I received some last minute help. Further, my thanks to the colleagues in aesthetics: Professor Esa Kirkkopelto, Ari Korhonen, Petteri Kum- mala, Lecturer Leena Laiho, Sanna Lehtinen, Miika Luoto, Dr. Kalle Puolakka, Sami Santanen, Jani Vanhala and Dr. Janne Vanhanen, with whom I had the luck of sharing an office for some time. I spent one term as a visiting researcher at the Jan van Eyck Academie, Maas- tricht in fall 2008. I wish to express my gratitude for the people at the academy: Director Koen Brams, advising researchers Katja Diefen- bach, Hanneke Grootenboer, Dominiek Hoens as well as my fellow researchers, especially Ines Lechleitner, Georgios Papadopoulos and Stéphane Querrec. During the doctoral studies I participated in an exhibition project that took me to Mongolia. Working with a challenging project may ruin a friendship, but in the case of artist Annu Wilenius a collegial relation turned gradually into a friendship. The same project united me with many other people: the artist duo Pink Twins (brothers Jusu and Vesa Vehviläinen), artists Bayanbatiin Chinbat, Yondonjunain Dalkh- Ochir, Ser-Od-Dolgor, Agnes Domke, Togmidshiirev Enkhbold, Sed- bazar Ganzug, Sonia Leimer, Oula Salokannel, as well as Docent Antti Ruotsala. In addition, all attempts to think with visual arts have been vital for the development of my research project. For the many oppor- tunities to work with and discuss art I wish to thank several people: xi Hanna Maria Anttila, Eeva-Mari Haikala, Henriikka Tavi, Hanna Ti- monen, Anna Tuori as well as many colleagues who have worked in the Museum of Contemporary Art Kiasma: Kaija Kaitavuori, Minna Raitmaa, Pirkko Siitari, as well as Eija Aarnio, Leevi Haapala, Kati Kivinen, Satu Metsola, Patrik Nyberg, Jari-Pekka Vanhala, among others.