-
I have nothing to… by Thomas van Linge
-
Fidelity
Fidelity is the quality of being faithful or loyal. Its original meaning regarded duty to a lord or a king, in a broader sense than the related concept of fealty. Both derive from the Latin word fidēlis A III adjective, meaning “faithful or loyal”.
-
Depiction
Depiction is meaning conveyed through pictures. Basically, a picture maps an object to a two-dimensional scheme or picture plane. Pictures are made with various materials and techniques, such as painting, drawing, or prints including photography and movies mosaics, tapestries, stained glass, and collages of unusual and disparate elements. Occasionally pictures may occur in simply inkblots, accidental stains, peculiar clouds or a glimpse of the moon, but these are special cases. Sculpture and performances are sometimes said to depict but this arises where depiction is taken to include all reference that is not linguistic or notational. The bulk of research in depiction however deals only in pictures. While sculpture and performance clearly represent or refer, they do not strictly picture their objects.
-
Institutional theory of art
The institutional theory of art is a theory about the nature of art that holds that an object can only be(come) art in the context of the institution known as “the artworld”.
Addressing the issue what makes, for example, Marcel Duchamp’s “readymades” art, or why a pile of Brillo cartons in a supermarket is not art, whereas Andy Warhol’s famous Brillo Boxes (a pile of Brillo carton replicas) is, the art critic and philosopher Arthur Danto wrote in his 1964 essay “The Artworld”:
To see something as art requires something the eye cannot descry—an atmosphere of artistic theory, a knowledge of the history of art: an artworld.[1]
According to Robert J. Yanal, Danto’s essay, which coined the term “artworld”, outlined the first institutional theory of art.[2]
Versions of the institutional theory were formulated more explicitly by George Dickie in his article “Defining Art” (American Philosophical Quarterly, 1969) and his books Aesthetics: An Introduction (1971) and Art and the Aesthetic: An Institutional Analysis (1974). An early version of Dickie’s institutional theory can be summed up in the following definition of work of art from Aesthetics: An Introduction:
A work of art in the classificatory sense is 1) an artifact 2) upon which some person or persons acting on behalf of a certain social institution (the artworld) has conferred the status of candidate for appreciation.[3]
Dickie has reformulated his theory in several books and articles. Other philosophers of art have criticized his definitions as being circular.[4]
via Institutional theory of art – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
-
George Dickie – Art and Audience
George Dickie – Art and AudiencePeople Visiting Art MuseumGeorge Dickie, a professor of philosophy at the University of Illinois in Chicago, postulated a theory about the relationship between art and the audience meant to receive it. His theory set about to define what art actually is and the context in which it applies to society. According to Dickie, art is something that is consciously presented to an audience with the intention of it being art. He does not seek to determine how this art is made; he gives no qualifications about what it takes exactly to make something art. What is important is the person presenting the piece. If they do not present the piece as art, the piece is not art. It is only based on the intentions that a work can become art.By the same token, however, the audience, which receives the artwork, is just as important. In order for something to be truly art, it needs to be shown to a group of people who have the ability to understand it and the intentions of the artist. They do not necessarily have to understand the theme of the work or, even to truly accept it as art. Having the potential to accept the work as art, though, is important. Without the audience, the work simply remains as a work and does not truly become art.This definition is actually rather broad in what it aims to accomplish. It simply states that unless an artist is consciously presenting a piece as art, it is not that. By turn, if the audience is not able to accept the piece as a work of art, it is not art. Therefore, a painting submitted to a field of cows is not art, but the same painting in a gallery would be.Photo: Courtesy of Hibino
-
the subconscious art of graffiti removal excerpt on Vimeo
-
Codex
A codex Latin caudex for “trunk of a tree” or block of wood, book; plural codices is a book in the format used for modern books, with separate pages normally bound together and given a cover.Developed by the Romans from wooden writing tablets, its gradual replacement of the scroll, the dominant form of book in the ancient world, has been termed the most important advance in the history of the book prior to the invention of printing.[1] The spread of the codex is often associated with the rise of Christianity, which adopted the format for the Bible early on.[2] First described by the 1st century AD Roman poet Martial, who already praised its convenient use, the codex achieved numerical parity with the scroll around 300 AD, and had completely replaced it throughout the now Christianised Greco-Roman world by the 6th century.[3]
-
Jetlag and Tinnitus Part 1 samples 02/11/06 – Si Begg – sample archive
-
The Experience and Perception of Time
We see colours, hear sounds and feel textures. Some aspects of the world, it seems, are perceived through a particular sense. Others, like shape, are perceived through more than one sense. But what sense or senses do we use when perceiving time? It is certainly not associated with one particular sense. In fact, it seems odd to say that we see, hear or touch time passing. And indeed, even if all our senses were prevented from functioning for a while, we could still notice the passing of time through the changing pattern of our thought. Perhaps, then, we have a special faculty, distinct from the five senses, for detecting time. Or perhaps, as seems more likely, we notice time through perception of other things. But how?
Time perception raises a number of intriguing puzzles, including what it means to say we perceive time. In this article, we shall explore the various processes through which we are made aware of time, and which influence the way we think time really is. Inevitably, we shall be concerned with the psychology of time perception, but the purpose of the article is to draw out the philosophical issues, and in particular whether and how aspects of our experience can be accommodated within certain metaphysical theories concerning the nature of time and causation.
via The Experience and Perception of Time (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).
-
Un Coup de Dés Jamais N’Abolira Le Hasard (Broodthaers)
Un Coup de Dés Jamais N’Abolira Le Hasard (A Throw of the Dice will Never Abolish Chance) is an artist’s book by Marcel Broodthaers published November 1969 in Antwerp. The work is a close copy of the first edition of the French Symbolist poet Stéphane Mallarmé’s poem of the same name, published in 1914, but with all the words removed, replaced by black stripes that correspond directly to the typographic layout used by Mallarmé to articulate the text.
“Broodthaers reduces Un Coup de Dés to its structure – or to put it another way he elevates the structure of the work to a concept worthy of study in its own right, thus acknowledging Mallarmé’s own fetishistic attention to this aspect of his work. Rendering the structure concrete, visible, almost tactile, Broodthaers offers a conceptual analysis of Mallarmé’s poem across the distance of a nearly a century…It would be hard to imagine a more subtle treatment of Mallarmé’s work, or one more capable of demonstrating its essential properties, than this reworked book by Broodthaers.” Johanna Drucker
Often included in exhibitions tracing the history of the artist’s book, the work is seen as a seminal example of the European post-avant-garde. It is often referred to simply as Un Coup de Dés.
Got any book recommendations?