Haecceity’ in Regard to Essentialist Artworks

CHAPTER 8 The Particularity of Objects and the Use of the Term ‘haecceity’ in Regard to Essentialist Artworks

8.1 Thisness and Whatness

The thisness of an object pertains to its being the particular thing that it is and not another, and that no other thing is. An object’s being the particular thing that it is, this thing, and not another, means that it has the individual property of being the particular thing that it is, which nothing else has. And it means that it has its particular identity, which everything else lacks. The whatness of an object pertains to its being what it is in kind and character, or it pertains to its particular or essential nature. Knowledge of the thisness of an object in art logically precedes knowledge of its whatness, in that the whatness of an artwork for subjects is dependent on, and presupposes, its thisness. Even if the knowledge of what an artwork is coincides with the knowledge of which object the work is to be understood to be, the latter knowledge is nevertheless presupposed by the for- mer knowledge, in that knowledge of what an artwork is cannot occur apart from knowledge of which object the work is meant to be. Thus the particular identity of a work must register in consciousness in order for consciousness of the nature of the work to be possible. In making a work of art then, or in effecting the identification of an artwork with some object, an artist has to single out a particular simple or complex object of some kind in some man- ner. The particular object that is singled out from all others is this particular object, and not another, that is meant to be this particular work of art, and not another. The thisness of an artwork is then primary, since any response to, including any interpretation and evaluation of, a particular artwork presupposes knowing which simple or complex object the work is to be understood to be. In order to apprehend the identity of a work of art, the subject’s attention has to be directed to a perceptual object on which apprehension of that identity depends. In that attention being so directed, it is understood, subliminally or consciously, that it is this object of attention on which apprehension of the identity of this work of art depends.

8.2 Whatness and Thisness

Although apprehending the thisness of the identity of an artwork is primary, there will be some level of whatness that pertains to that identity that is grasped in that apprehension. This is because, in knowing which object an artwork is to be understood to be, a subject will also know what the object is in at least some basic senses. A subject will know what it is, tacitly or explicitly, in knowing that it will fall under certain basic concepts, including those of being an object, being an object of whose identity it is possible to be aware, and being a work of art.1 This does not affect the point that the higher-level whatness of the artwork, which concerns how the artwork is to be more fully understood and appreciated, is logically dependent on knowing which object it is that the work is to be understood to be.

8.3 The Primacy of Thisness

As indicated, the thisness of an artwork concerns its particular identity, and the whatness of an artwork, in the more sophisticated sense, concerns the essence or nature of that particular identity—what sort of thing it is in being that particular object, or its individual character. If the thisness of an artwork is presupposed by its whatness, then investigations in Essentialist identity and Abstraction must first target the thisness of an object singled out by the artist to be a particular work of art. This does not mean that the whatness of the object is unimportant and that it is forgotten. It is quite important, and works of the series illustrate that it is certainly not forgotten. It is just that, as comprehending the whatness of an artwork is dependent on comprehending its thisness, both the determination of identity, and a limit of Abstraction, rest on producing and understanding, or producing in understanding, the thisness of the object that a work is meant to be. The whatness of an Essentialist object will not only depend on, but will be designed directly to concern, and may perfectly coincide with, its thisness—its being this particular thing and not another—as its thisness is determined in relation to essential elements of an

1 It should be understood that being aware of the identity of a work is equivalent to being aware that the work is meant to be a particular object. And it should be understood that that knowledge is consistent with not being able to be aware of—in the sense of being able to perceive or to otherwise experience—the object itself that the work is to be understood to be. Haecceity 12.0.0 is an example.