DOCSLIB.ORG

Art, Research, Philosophy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Art, Research, Philosophy ART, RESEARCH, PHILOSOPHY Art, Research, Philosophy explores the emergent field of artistic research: art produced as a contribution to knowledge. As a new subject, it raises several questions: What is art-as-research? Don’t the requirements of research amount to an imposition on the artistic process that dilutes the power of art? How can something subjective become objective? What is the relationship between art and writing? Doesn’t description always miss the particularity of the artwork? This is the first book-length study to show how ideas in philosophy can be applied to artistic research to answer its questions and to make proposals for its future. Clive Cazeaux argues that artistic research is an exciting development in the historical debate between aesthetics and the theory of knowledge. The book draws upon Kant, phenomenology and critical theory to show how the immediacies of art and experience are enmeshed in the structures that create knowledge. The power of art to act on these structures is illustrated through a series of studies that look clo- sely at a number of contemporary artworks. This book will be ideal for postgraduate students and scholars of the visual and creative arts, aesthetics and art theory. Clive Cazeaux is Professor of Aesthetics at Cardiff Metropolitan University, Wales, UK. He is the author of Metaphor and Continental Philosophy: From Kant to Derrida (2007) and the editor of The Continental Aesthetics Reader (2011). His research interests are the philosophies of metaphor, visual thinking, artistic research and art–science practice. ART, RESEARCH, PHILOSOPHY Clive Cazeaux First published 2017 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon OX14 4RN and by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2017 Clive Cazeaux The right of Clive Cazeaux to be identified as author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. The Open Access version of this book, available at www.taylorfrancis.com, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data A catalog record has been requested ISBN: 978-1-138-78977-7 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-138-78978-4 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-76461-0 (ebk) Typeset in Bembo by Taylor & Francis Books For my mother, Dorothy Jean Cazeaux. CONTENTS List of figures viii Acknowledgments ix Introduction 1 1 The theories that wedge art and knowledge apart 11 2 What is artistic research? 33 3 We need to talk about concepts 51 4 Writing as rupture and relation 77 5 Insights from the metaphorical dimension of making 91 6 Does ‘art doctored’ equal ‘art neutered’? 109 7 Drawing with Merleau-Ponty: a study in the constellation of concepts 129 8 The aesthetics of research after the end of art 151 Conclusion 175 Index 183 FIGURES 3.1 Karla Black, Pleaser, 2009. Cellophane, paint, Sellotape, thread, 250 x 200 cm. © Karla Black. Courtesy Galerie Gisela Capitain, Cologne. Photograph © Fred Dott. 57 5.1 Vija Celmins, Night Sky #19, 1998. Charcoal on paper, 57.0 x 67.3 cm. © Vija Celmins. Courtesy Matthew Marks Gallery, New York. Photograph © Tate, London 2016. 99 5.2 Vija Celmins, Night Sky #18, 1998. Charcoal on paper, 48.5 x 58.5 cm. © Vija Celmins. Courtesy Matthew Marks Gallery, New York. Photograph © Tate, London 2016. 103 7.1 humhyphenhum (Deborah Harty and Phil Sawdon), The Taste of Tree? Layer 3 Digital Drawing 2, 2011. © Deborah Harty and Phil Sawdon. Courtesy the artists. 133 8.1 Walid Raad/The Atlas Group, still from We Can Make Rain But No One Came to Ask, 2003/2006. DVD projection, colour, 18 minutes. © Walid Raad. Courtesy Paula Cooper Gallery, New York. 166 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The ideas in this book have benefitted from discussions with colleagues at Cardiff School of Art and Design, and the Wales Institute for Research into Art and Design, Wales, UK. I would like to thank doctoral students past and present for the opportunities to discuss their art practice as research: Jan Bennett, Linda Carreiro, John Hammersley, Robin Hawes, Babette Martini, Natasha Mayo, Alise Piebalga and Helena Sands. I am grateful to Karen Harman and Carol Jones for their extremely valuable comments on chapter drafts. A special ‘thank you’ must go to Christopher Norris for all the art–philosophy conversations, and for giving me the book that put me on to metaphor all those years ago. I am grateful to the artists (and their galleries) Karla Black (Galerie Gisela Capi- tain, Cologne), Vija Celmins (Matthew Marks Gallery, New York), Deborah Harty and Phil Sawdon, and Walid Raad (Paula Cooper Gallery, New York) for granting me permission to reproduce images of their work. Some parts of the book have been published previously. Sections of chapter 4 appeared in: ‘Words and Things in Phenomenology and Existentialism’,inC. Norris and K. Knellwolf (eds), Cambridge History of Literary Criticism, Volume 9: Twentieth-Century Historical, Philosophical and Psychological Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, 2001; ‘Categories in Action: Sartre and the Theory–Practice Debate’, Journal of Visual Art Practice 2, 2002; and ‘Interrupting the Artist: Theory, Practice and Topology in Sartre’s Aesthetics’, in K. Macleod and L. Holdridge (eds), Thinking Through Art: Reflections on Art as Research, Routledge, 2006. An early version of chapter 5 appeared as ‘Insights from the Metaphorical Dimension of Making’ in the journal Lo Sguardo 17, 2015. I am grateful to the publishers con- cerned for permission to reprint this material. Finally, I wish to thank Jamie Askew, Natalie Foster, Emma Håkonsen and Sheni Kruger at Routledge for their guidance and support throughout the production of the book. INTRODUCTION What is ‘artistic research’? I say ‘artistic research’. I could have used a number of alternative names: ‘art as research’, ‘arts-based research’, ‘creative research’, ‘fine art research’, ‘practice-based research’, ‘practice-led research’ and ‘visual arts research’. It is by no means clear whether they all refer to exactly the same thing. I don’t propose to identify how one differs from another, since there is too much shifting and sharing of cares and concerns between them. The growth in very similar vocabulary, together with the number of publications, is an indication of interest in the area(s), but also a sign of the uncertainties and anxieties surrounding the idea that art can be or can create research. There are also similar developments in creative writing, music, theatre and performance. For a list of some of the book-length studies in the fields, see the bibliography at the end of this introduction. In this book, I am primarily interested in fine art or visual arts research. I shall refer to the topic as ‘artistic research’, while being mindful of its near-synonyms and the fact that it does not have an agreed definition. This is because it draws a contrast with conventional or scientific research, and appears to be sticking as a title in recent literature (e.g. Borgdorff 2012; Schwab 2013; Slager 2015). While there is uncertainty over the name and the idea, one area upon which there is general agreement is the origin of artistic research: the growth of audit culture in university research, and the marketization of higher education. The first research assessment exercise (RAE) was conducted in the United Kingdom in 1986 with the purpose of identifying which university departments merited government research funding (although it was originally called the Research Selectivity Exercise). As Bence and Oppenheim note, it was ‘a relatively low-key affair involving only “traditional” universities’ with ‘only a small proportion of [government] funding being apportioned as a result of the ratings’ (Bence and Oppenheim 2005: 144). However, by the third RAE in 1992, virtually all government research funding was decided by the ratings scored by university departments in the exercise (Bence and 2 Introduction Oppenheim 2005: 144). By the end of the 1990s, comparable exercises were being conducted in Australia, Hong Kong, Poland and Slovakia, with Germany, Italy, the Nordic countries, Hungary and New Zealand using a small component of research assessment alongside another, more heavily weighted measure, typically research student numbers (Roberts 2003: 92). Up until this point, art had not been a research subject in the sense recognized by the RAE. In the United Kingdom, art had only entered the academy as a subject for study in higher education in the 1960s as a result of the Coldstream Report, published by the National Advisory Council on Art Education. The recommendation of Coldstream was that art edu- cation should move from its traditional emphasis on drawing skills, anatomy and professional craft-based training towards ‘a liberal education in art’, with the main manifestation of this shift being the addition of an historical and contextual studies component that would constitute 20 per cent of the course (Candlin 2001: 303– 304). If government funding, and consequently the prestige and viability of a department, were now linked to research quality and the number of research degree students, then art, or the managers who now had responsibility for the subject in their universities, would need to get a slice of the pie. As a result, artistic research emerges with a number of anxieties: (1) It is wholly the product of institutional, managerial forces, a subject brought into being to raise the profile and the income of departments.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Retrieving Kant's Aesthetics for Art Theory After
    8 Retrieving Kant’s Aesthetics for Art Theory After Greenberg Some Remarks on Arthur C. Danto and Thierry de Duve Diarmuid Costello The Fate of Aesthetics in Contemporary Art Theory In art theory since the early 1980s the discourse of aesthetics has been notable by its absence. Th is suggests that the majority of art theorists believe that the historical or conceptual limits of aesthetic theory have been breached by the internal development of art after modernism. But why would art theorists believe this? I n a n s w e r t o t h i s q u e s t i o n I s u g g e s t — I t a k e i t n o n c o n t r o v e r s i a l l y — t h a t the widespread marginalization of aesthetics in postmodern art theory may be attributed to the success of the art critic and theorist Clement Greenberg. In co- opting the discourse of (particularly Kantian) aesthetics to underwrite modernist theory, Greenberg mediated the art world’s sub- sequent rejection of both aesthetics in general and Immanuel Kant’s aes- thetics in par tic u lar. But one need only refl ect on the centrality for postmodern theory of anti- aesthetic fi gures like Marcel Duchamp or of movements (such as surrealism), marginalized in Greenberg’s account of “the best modern art,” to see that for all their antipathy to Greenberg, many postmodernist art theorists continue to operate with a broadly Greenbergian view of aesthetics—which is why, of course, they are forced to reject it.
    [Show full text]
  • Outline of a Sociological Theory of Art Perception∗
    From: Pierre Bordieu The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature ©1984, Columbia University Press Part III: The Pure Gaze: Essays on Art, Chapter 8 Outline of a Sociological Theory of Art Perception∗ PIERRE BOURDIEU 1 Any art perception involves a conscious or unconscious deciphering operation. 1.1 An act of deciphering unrecognized as such, immediate and adequate ‘comprehension’, is possible and effective only in the special case in which the cultural code which makes the act of deciphering possible is immediately and completely mastered by the observer (in the form of cultivated ability or inclination) and merges with the cultural code which has rendered the work perceived possible. Erwin Panofsky observes that in Rogier van der Weyden’s painting The Three Magi we immediately perceive the representation of an apparition’ that of a child in whom we recognize ‘the Infant Jesus’. How do we know that this is an apparition? The halo of golden rays surrounding the child would not in itself be sufficient proof, because it is also found in representations of the nativity in which the Infant Jesus is ‘real’. We come to this conclusion because the child is hovering in mid-air without visible support, and we do so although the representation would scarcely have been different had the child been sitting on a pillow (as in the case of the model which Rogier van der Weyden probably used). But one can think of hundreds of pictures in which human beings, animals or inanimate objects appear to be hovering in mid-air, contrary to the law of gravity, yet without giving the impression of being apparitions.
    [Show full text]
  • AH 302: the Idea of the Aesthetic Syllabus Course Description Texts
    Fall 2020 AH 302: The Idea of the Aesthetic Syllabus The schedule of classes/readings is subject to change. Registered students should consult the syllabus on Google Classrooms, which will be kept updated. Instructor: Katalin Makkai Course times: Monday and Wednesday 15:45-17:15 Email: [email protected] Office hours: TBA Office: P98 004 Course description “Aesthetics” and “aesthetic” are terms that are often taken for granted inside as well as outside academic discourse. We speak of aesthetic experiences and judgments and qualities, and we employ “aesthetics” to designate the study of such matters. Although their root is taken from the Greek, the now-familiar terms (in their now-familiar usages) are, however, comparatively new. They are commonly regarded as having been introduced into the philosophical lexicon in the eighteenth century—a few hundred years ago. This course studies some of the texts that were key to the discovery, or perhaps the invention, of the “aesthetic”. What work was the idea meant to do? How did its evolution retain or reconfigure its original senses and purposes? Is the idea of the aesthetic problematic, ideological, or chimerical? Do we need an idea of the aesthetic to think about art? Texts All readings will be provided during the semester electronically and are to be brought to class as printouts. Electronic devices Students may not use any electronic devices (laptop, tablet, mobile phone) in the classroom, unless an accommodation letter has been issued. Requirements ACADEMIC INTEGRITY ​ ​ ​ Bard College Berlin maintains the staunchest regard for academic integrity and expects good academic practice from students in their studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Plato's Theory of Art: Aesthetics and the Timaeus
    Rethinking Plato’s Theory of Art: Aesthetics and the Timaeus Omid Tofighian Introduction The Timaeus presents a fascinating account of the cosmos. It includes a creation myth that introduces the figure known as the ‘Demiurge’, who, despite the fact that he is the cause of the sensible world, is reverently attributed with reason, and whose creation – the cosmos – is actually beautiful and good. In this dialogue Plato offers his readers a panorama of the universe. But just what are his intentions for this? Is his approach a precursor to the methods of natural science,1 or does the Timaeus fall under the category of theology? This paper will discuss Plato’s cosmological treatise and certain consequences that can be drawn, that is, how the methods used to analyse the origins and structure of the universe reveal a more existential attitude towards aesthetics. In the Timaeus Plato explores the complexities of mimesis and entertains the possibility that imitation could actually exhibit ideal qualities. These considerations have repercussions for the status of the material world in Plato’s cosmology, but they may also be extended to rethink his theory of art. I wish to analyse a number of salient themes in the Timaeus such as ontology, mythic symbols and the use of rhetoric. I will demonstrate how Plato’s view towards these themes in the Timaeus can be extrapolated to reassess his aesthetics. My critical analysis will provoke the question – ‘What evaluation of art would Plato have offered in accordance with the positions explicated in the Timaeus?’ Upon investigating a number of dialogues, searching specifically for references to art or representation, I realised that certain views I had thought to be exclusive to the Timaeus, or other late dialogues, also featured in works as early as the Ion.
    [Show full text]
  • Art, Clive Bell
    PHI 3240: Philosophy of Art Session 3 September 9th, 2015 Matisse, Henri. (1905) Luxe, Calme, et Volupte. Collingwood & Bell on the Ontology of Art 1 Today we officially begin a unit on the ontology of art, Ø the attempt to answer the question “What is art?” Ø This question is ambiguous. Is it asking: • What is the nature of artworks?, or • What is the nature of the practice of art? Ø We are going to read these authors as if they are answering the question as a claim about artworks. Before discussing Collingwood’s & Bell’s answers, let’s consider a theoretical predecessor. • The earliest views about art we have on record are mimetic, or representational theories: – these say that artworks mimic & depict images/events from the real world. • As Shakespeare’s Hamlet says about plays, artworks were understood to “hold as ‘twere the ‘play within a play’ the mirror up to nature” (Act 3, Scene 2) in Hamlet 2 Representational views were common among the ancient Greeks (e.g. Plato), • and popularized in 18th century Europe (especially by Charles Batteaux, in “The Fine Arts Reduced to a Common Principle” (trans. from French) Why have representational theories of art fallen out of favor? Greek sculpture, Fragonard, Jean-Honoré. nd Ø There are tons of counterexamples 2 -century B.C. (1772) The Reader. to the view, e.g.: – visual artworks which don’t clearly depict any recognizable objects or events (beginning in 1800s), – and purely instrumental music (e.g., symphonies) without lyrics or guiding narratives. • Mozart’s #40 in G Minor (1788): bit.ly/1O2GbSp Turner, Joseph Mallord William.
    [Show full text]
  • Kant, Art, and Art History
    Kant, Art, and Art History Moments of Discipline mark a. cheetham University of Toronto published by the press syndicate of the university of cambridge The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom cambridge university press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge cb2 2ru, uk 40 West 20th Street, New York, ny 10011-4211, usa 10 Stamford Road, Oakleigh, vic 3166, Australia Ruiz de Alarcon ´ 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain Dock House, The Waterfront, Cape Town 8001, South Africa http://www.cambridge.org Mark A. Cheetham 2001 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2001 Printed in the United States of America Typeface Concorde 9.75/13 pt. System MagnaType [ag] A catalog record for this book is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Cheetham, Mark A. (Mark Arthur), 1954– Kant, Art, and Art History: moments of discipline / Mark A. Cheetham. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 0-521-80018-8 1. Kant, Immanuel, 1724–1804–Contributions in aesthetics. 2. Aesthetics, Modern. 3. Art–Philosophy. I. Title. b2799.A4 c48 2001 111′.85′092–dc21 00-063029 isbn 0 521 80018 8 hardback Contents Acknowledgments page ix 1 Introduction: Bo(a)rders 1 Why (Not) Kant? 7 Moments and Places of Discipline 11 Plasmatics 24 2 Place and Time: Kant in Rome, c. 1800 38 Kant in Rome 41 The Concurrency of Reception 45 The Politics of Beauty 52 3 The Genealogy of Authority: Kant and Art’s History in the Twentieth Century 67 “Immanent Meaning” and the Historicity of Art: 68 Panofsky and Kant Kant and Cubism Revisited 78 Clement Greenberg’s Strategic Formalism 87 4 The Sublime Is Now (Again): French Theory / International Art 101 Derrida’s Sublime 103 The Sublime Is Now (Again) 114 Scapes 124 The Limits of Pointing 130 Intimations of a Countersublime 136 vii contents 5 Kant’s Skull: Portraits and the Image of Philosophy, c.
    [Show full text]
  • The Significance and Insignificance of Clive Bell's Formalism I
    Navorsingsartikels/Research articles The significance and insignificance of Clive Bell’s formalism i Johan Snyman Dept, of Philosophy Rand Afrikaans University JOHANNESBURG Abstract Clive Bell coined the phrase significant form. The way he initially defined the phrase and the way he implemented it were two different matters. In this article Bell's procedure is analysed as a characteristic of late moder­ nist aesthetics, i.e. an attempt to come to terms with the challenge o f the radically new in art. It is suggested that one should bear in mind that formalism in this sense is a theory of artistic material which explains how meaning is communicated and perceived through non-discursive qualities o f the artistic material. That is the relevance o f Susanne K. Longer's re- interpretation o f Bell's phrase. 1. Introduction Clive Bell’s aesthetics does not make for profound reading. Why bother then? The least one can say is that Bell contributed towards the modem aesthetic vocabulary by coining a phrase that has since become a cliché or hackneyed for that matter, viz. significant form. On the other hand, if one reflects from a distance on the Wirkungsgeschichte of Bell’s phrase as well as on the Wirkungs- geschichte of the problem he wanted to solve, significant form has an intriguing logic. Significant form as an aesthetic category has spawned quite a generation of related concepts, from Clive Bell to Susanne K. Langer’s unconsummated symbol, up to Nelson Goodman’s languages of art (Goodman, 1976), Peter A revised version of a paper read at a 2nd International Symposium on Formalism, organized by the Slovenian Society of Aesthetics in Ljubljana, 14-17 May 1992.
    [Show full text]
  • Kant Expressive Theory Music
    Kant’s Expressive Theory of Music Samantha Matherne Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism (2014, pre-print) Abstract: Several prominent philosophers of art (e.g., Kivy, Dahlhaus, Schueller) have worried whether Kant has a coherent theory of music on account of two perceived tensions in his view. First, there appears to be a conflict between his formalist and expressive commitments. Second (and even worse), Kant defends seemingly contradictory claims about music being beautiful and merely agreeable, i.e., not beautiful. Against these critics, I show that Kant has a consistent view of music that reconciles these tensions. I argue that, for Kant, music can be experienced as either agreeable or beautiful depending upon the attitude we take towards it. Though we might be tempted to think he argues that we experience music as agreeable when we attend to its expressive qualities and as beautiful when we attend to its formal properties, I demonstrate that he actually claims that we are able to judge music as beautiful only if we are sensitive to the expression of emotion through musical form. With this revised understanding of Kant’s theory of music in place, I conclude by sketching a Kantian solution to a central problem in the philosophy of music: given that music is not sentient, how can it express emotion? §1. Introduction As philosophers like Peter Kivy and Stephen Davies have emphasized, one of the central issues in the philosophy of music is the problem of expression.1 Frequently when we hear a piece of instrumental music, we describe it as expressing an emotion, e.g., Beethoven’s ‘Eroica’ symphony sounds triumphant or Chopin’s Étude in E Major (Op.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Thesis
    A DEFENSE OF AESTHETIC ANTIESSENTIALISM: MORRIS WEITZ AND THE POSSIBLITY OF DEFINING ‘ART’ _____________________________ A Thesis Presented to The Honors Tutorial College Ohio University _____________________________ In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for Graduation from the Honors Tutorial College with the degree of Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy and Art History _____________________________ By Jordan Mills Pleasant June, 2010 ii This thesis has been approved by The Honors Tutorial College and the Department of Philosophy ___________________________ Dr. Arthur Zucker Chair, Department of Philosophy Thesis Advisor ___________________________ Dr. Scott Carson Honors Tutorial College, Director of Studies Philosophy ___________________________ Jeremy Webster Dean, Honors Tutorial College iii This thesis has been approved by The Honors Tutorial College and the Department of Art History ___________________________ Dr. Jennie Klein Chair, Department of Art History Thesis Advisor ___________________________ Dr. Jennie Klein Honors Tutorial College, Director of Studies Art History ___________________________ Jeremy Webster Dean, Honors Tutorial College iv Dedicated to Professor Arthur Zucker, without whom this work would have been impossible. v Table Of Contents Thesis Approval Pages Page ii Introduction: A Brief History of the Role of Definitions in Art Page 1 Chapter I: Morris Weitz’s “The Role of Theory in Aesthetics” Page 8 Chapter II: Lewis K. Zerby’s “A Reconsideration of the Role of the Theory in Aesthetics. A Reply to Morris Weitz”
    [Show full text]
  • Religion and the Arts in America
    Religion and the Arts in America CAMILLE PAGLIA At this moment in America, religion and pol- itics are at a flash point. Conservative Christians deplore the left-wing bias of the mainstream media and the saturation of popular culture by sex and violence and are promoting strate- gies such as faith-based home-schooling to protect children from the chaotic moral relativism of a secular society. Liberals in turn condemn the meddling by Christian fundamentalists in politics, notably in regard to abortion and gay civil rights or the Mideast, where biblical assumptions, it is claimed, have shaped us policy. There is vicious mutual recrimination, with believers caricatured as paranoid, apocalyptic crusaders who view America’s global mission as divinely inspired, while lib- erals are portrayed as narcissistic hedonists and godless elit- ists, relics of the unpatriotic, permissive 1960s. A primary arena for the conservative-liberal wars has been the arts. While leading conservative voices defend the tradi- tional Anglo-American literary canon, which has been under challenge and in flux for forty years, American conservatives on the whole, outside of the New Criterion magazine, have shown little interest in the arts, except to promulgate a didac- tic theory of art as moral improvement that was discarded with the Victorian era at the birth of modernism. Liberals, on the other hand, have been too content with the high visibility of the arts in metropolitan centers, which comprise only a fraction of America. Furthermore, liberals have been compla- cent about the viability of secular humanism as a sustaining A lecture delivered on 6 February 2007 as the 2007 Cornerstone Arts Lecture at Colorado College.
    [Show full text]
  • Morris Weitz Aili W
    University of Dayton eCommons Philosophy Faculty Publications Department of Philosophy 2014 Morris Weitz Aili W. Bresnahan University of Dayton, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ecommons.udayton.edu/phl_fac_pub Part of the History of Philosophy Commons eCommons Citation Bresnahan, Aili W., "Morris Weitz" (2014). Philosophy Faculty Publications. 4. https://ecommons.udayton.edu/phl_fac_pub/4 This Encyclopedia Entry is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Philosophy at eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Philosophy Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Word Count: 2,494 [Main body text: 1,189; Bibliography: 1,305] Weitz, Morris (1916-1981), American philosopher of aesthetics who focused primarily on ontology, interpretation, and literary criticism. Weitz’ Initial Theory of Art. Morris Weitz’ initial theory of art was provided in his book, Philosophy of the Arts (Weitz 1950). Here Weitz calls his theory of art “empirical” and “organic,” and he defined “art” as “an organic complex or integration of expressive elements embodied in a sensuous medium” (51). By “empirical” he means that his theory answers to the evidence provided by actual works of art. “Organic,” for Weitz, means that each element is to be considered in relation to the others in a living and not merely mechanical way. Weitz also has a broad understanding of “expressive,” which refers to an artistic property that functions as a semiotic sign, either of a specific emotional feeling, an emotional quality, or another sign of an emotional feature.
    [Show full text]
  • TERRY SMITH, FAHA, CIHA, Is Andrew W. Mellon Professor Of
    TERRY SMITH at the Garage Museum of Art, Moscow, 2015. Photo: Denis Sinyakov. Courtesy of Terry Smith. ERRY SMITH, FAHA, CIHA, is Art and Director of the Power Institute, Ideas: On Conceptual Art and Concep‑ Andrew W. Mellon Professor of Foundation for Art and Visual Culture, tualism (Durham: Duke University Press, TContemporary Art History and University of Sydney. In the 1970s he was 2017), and Art to Come: Histories of Con‑ Theory in the Department of the His- a member of the Art & Language group temporary Art (Durham: Duke University tory of Art and Architecture at the (New York) and a founder of Union Me- Press, 2019). He is editor of many others University of Pittsburgh, and Profes- dia Services (Sydney). He is the author including Antinomies of Art and Culture: sor in the Division of Philosophy, Art, of a number of books, notably Making Modernity, postmodernity and contem‑ and Critical Thought at the European the Modern: Industry, Art and Design in poraneity (with Nancy Condee and Ok- Graduate School. He is also Lecturer at America (University of Chicago Press, wui Enwezor, Duke University Press, Large in the Curatorial Program of the 1993); Transformations in Australian Art 2008). A foundation Board member of School of Visual Arts, New York. In 2010 (Craftsman House, Sydney, 2002); The the Museum of Contemporary Art, Syd- he was named the Australia Council Vis- Architecture of Aftermath (University ney, he is currently a Board member of ual Arts Laureate, and won the Mather of Chicago Press, 2006), What is Con‑ the Carnegie Museum of Art, Pittsburgh, Award for art criticism conferred by the temporary Art? (University of Chicago and of the Biennial Foundation, New College Art Association (USA).
    [Show full text]