Remember
that this assignment and film is an inquiry into the questions
and problems I can see with my dissertation and opens up possible
avenues to explore…. Questions, I am not seeking answers at this point, I
am seeking points to explore.
Thursday, 7 November 2013
Batchen
To research... ASAP
(sourced from guest lecturer)
Batchen in camera Lucida: p133 + p139
‘He is dead and he is going to die’
Future anterior tense
Andre bazin - the ontology of the image
Interesting stuff!!!
(sourced from guest lecturer)
Batchen in camera Lucida: p133 + p139
‘He is dead and he is going to die’
Future anterior tense
Andre bazin - the ontology of the image
Interesting stuff!!!
The next step...
The next steps...
The problems lie in the:
1. Photographer / author
2. Interpreter / seer / audience
Investigate metaphysical implications… My initial premise focused on the sociological formation of indented and excluded the philosophical nature of identity over time (self-portrait) (emergence)
Possible worlds: created when choosing one photograph over another, it represents an event.
Intentional + affective fallacy
Amalgamation of myself: Foucault shopping list, expand more on the notion of what is an author?
The concept of time… A paradox.
Is a self portrait even art? (Institutional theory) more Kant.
Representation
The self - souls, identity… Memory (Kant equivalence)
Reasoning - making depictions (interpretation) judgements
Free will - determinism causation, Kant again, clockwork
- Laura mulvey, death 24x a second, stillness and the moving image
- damian sutton, photography cinema memory - the crystal image of time
- David green + Joanna Lowry stillness and tim: photography and the moving image … Issuu.com
- deleuze continental philosophy, cinema 1 cinema 2 (identity and difference)
- contemporary science and time: object orientated ontology [ooo]
- philosophy goes to the movies
- Wynn bullock
Kant on time in the system
Heidegger towards death
Create a manifesto?
Ontology of the photographer… *****
(A lot of these things seem to do with the nature and existence of the photographer)
1. Photographer / author
2. Interpreter / seer / audience
Investigate metaphysical implications… My initial premise focused on the sociological formation of indented and excluded the philosophical nature of identity over time (self-portrait) (emergence)
Possible worlds: created when choosing one photograph over another, it represents an event.
Intentional + affective fallacy
Amalgamation of myself: Foucault shopping list, expand more on the notion of what is an author?
The concept of time… A paradox.
Is a self portrait even art? (Institutional theory) more Kant.
Representation
The self - souls, identity… Memory (Kant equivalence)
Reasoning - making depictions (interpretation) judgements
Free will - determinism causation, Kant again, clockwork
- Laura mulvey, death 24x a second, stillness and the moving image
- damian sutton, photography cinema memory - the crystal image of time
- David green + Joanna Lowry stillness and tim: photography and the moving image … Issuu.com
- deleuze continental philosophy, cinema 1 cinema 2 (identity and difference)
- contemporary science and time: object orientated ontology [ooo]
- philosophy goes to the movies
- Wynn bullock
Kant on time in the system
Heidegger towards death
Create a manifesto?
Ontology of the photographer… *****
(A lot of these things seem to do with the nature and existence of the photographer)
PH4024 - Kant on Beauty...
4 categories of aesthetic experience
- The Agreeable
- The Good
- Beauty
- The sublime.
His ideas have been very influential
The Critique of Judgement
When a man judges beauty he judges not just for himself but for all men… unlike subjective tastes “this olive is delicious” well that could be different to many people… the olive being beautiful however? Would be a more objective thing, we would of thought.. or is it…
- Beauty is a subjective experience in someones mind, just like taste.
- However, we do not care if the beautiful thing is real or not [contestable] the physical object exists does it not
- IMPORTANT DISTINCTIONS
The agreeable is what GRATIFIES a man; the beautiful what simply PLEASES him; the good what is ESTEEMED (approved), i.e., that on which he sets an objective worth.
- agreeable, linked to some desire like hunger or lust
- Something is good, linked to our moral judgement
- Beauty is free of these ties… more PURE, we are disinterested in the object itself.
We feel beauty immediately upon witnessing it
No conditions by logic can be placed upon the object… It’s beauty must be inherent to it and self-inherent.
- A sense of beauty must be universal.
When i pronounce something to be beautiful, I am not saying so for myself, but as something that is beautiful to everybody.
PROBLEMS: emotions and feelings can get in the way and bring impurity to ‘beauty’ …. But we can’t remove yourself from our feelings…
When we experience a beautiful object, it can only be beautiful as a complete thing its totality of form. Must be beautiful in itself, without thought to an end…. eg a car. without thought of how it drives
Beauty can be sensed by all of us, without need for communication. Its universal… But emotion and experience can deepen the beauty we feel…
- The Agreeable
- The Good
- Beauty
- The sublime.
His ideas have been very influential
The Critique of Judgement
When a man judges beauty he judges not just for himself but for all men… unlike subjective tastes “this olive is delicious” well that could be different to many people… the olive being beautiful however? Would be a more objective thing, we would of thought.. or is it…
- Beauty is a subjective experience in someones mind, just like taste.
- However, we do not care if the beautiful thing is real or not [contestable] the physical object exists does it not
- IMPORTANT DISTINCTIONS
The agreeable is what GRATIFIES a man; the beautiful what simply PLEASES him; the good what is ESTEEMED (approved), i.e., that on which he sets an objective worth.
- agreeable, linked to some desire like hunger or lust
- Something is good, linked to our moral judgement
- Beauty is free of these ties… more PURE, we are disinterested in the object itself.
We feel beauty immediately upon witnessing it
No conditions by logic can be placed upon the object… It’s beauty must be inherent to it and self-inherent.
- A sense of beauty must be universal.
When i pronounce something to be beautiful, I am not saying so for myself, but as something that is beautiful to everybody.
PROBLEMS: emotions and feelings can get in the way and bring impurity to ‘beauty’ …. But we can’t remove yourself from our feelings…
When we experience a beautiful object, it can only be beautiful as a complete thing its totality of form. Must be beautiful in itself, without thought to an end…. eg a car. without thought of how it drives
Beauty can be sensed by all of us, without need for communication. Its universal… But emotion and experience can deepen the beauty we feel…
The Intentional Fallacy
Influential critical theory - 20th century
Interpretation of a work should focus purely on its objective qualities, we should diregard ALL external/extrinsic factors (biographical, historical) concerning the author.
The MISTAKE of judging the value/meaning of a work by factors such as these is called the intentional fallacy.
"one doesn’t need to know the artist’s private intentions. The work tells all." - Susan Sontag
…originally, Literary criticism.
The Affective Fallacy
- in appreciating a work of art, we can expect that different audiences will respond in different ways + form different opinions.
- We expect each interpret to form their own interpretation (a different meaning on the world)
- All these can’t be supported by the artists intention, so the intentional fallacy seems plausible.
- “The mistake of confusing the impact that a work might have on its audience with its meaning - the affective fallacy”
Interpretation of a work should focus purely on its objective qualities, we should diregard ALL external/extrinsic factors (biographical, historical) concerning the author.
The MISTAKE of judging the value/meaning of a work by factors such as these is called the intentional fallacy.
"one doesn’t need to know the artist’s private intentions. The work tells all." - Susan Sontag
…originally, Literary criticism.
The Affective Fallacy
- in appreciating a work of art, we can expect that different audiences will respond in different ways + form different opinions.
- We expect each interpret to form their own interpretation (a different meaning on the world)
- All these can’t be supported by the artists intention, so the intentional fallacy seems plausible.
- “The mistake of confusing the impact that a work might have on its audience with its meaning - the affective fallacy”
YouTube is lacking...
Ideal, informative + VISUAL discussions of various
philosophers and their theories…. thank goodness for three minute
philosophy videos, they ARE interesting but only bitesize chunks as an
verview…
What is Art?
---> sourced from 50 philosophy questions book.
The battle between the artist + the critic.
"The conflict is timeless and beyond resolution because it is motivated by a fundamental disagreement on the most basic of questions: What is Art?"
Representation - - - - - - - - - Abstraction
John Ruskin + James McNeill Whistler
- they disagree on the nature of aesthetic value.
- Greeks (Plato) Art is a representation/mirror of nature. Plato regarded works of art as a poor reflection/imitation of truth.
- Aristotle shared these view, but, more sympathetic view of its objects, they’re a completion of what was only partially realised in nature, insight into the universal essence of things.
The eye of the beholder
- Is beauty inherently in the objects it is ascribed to?
- realist vs anti-realist views.
- support: Kant’s universal validity: aesthetic judgements are based purely on our subjective responses and feelings; but so ingrained in human nature that they are universally valid… “any properly constituted human can share them”
The Institutional Theory
- widely discussed since 1970s…
- Works of art have that status by virtue, bestowed upon them by authorised members of the art world.
- Difficulties… influential, but uninformative, we want to know WHY.
Formalist approach to art in 20th century.
- line, colour _ other formal qualities were considered paramount.
- Form was elevated over content
- Paved the way for Abstractionism
- Another influential departure from representation: expressionism… Expressions of the artist’s subjective emotion and experience were regarded as the hallmark of true works of art.
Family Resemblance
- As with many of Socratic Dialogues, a question is posed to be defined… The problem is a lot of things we seem to know what they are but are unable to define it.
- ONE WAY OUT… Wittgenstein: family resemblance. “games” we can easily give examples of games, but trouble arises when we try and find a definition that encompasses every instance. NO COMMON DENOMINATOR.
- so for art, pieces might have much in common with other pieces, but if we look for features they all possess, we will search in vain.
"any attempt to define art is misconceived and doomed to failure"
The battle between the artist + the critic.
"The conflict is timeless and beyond resolution because it is motivated by a fundamental disagreement on the most basic of questions: What is Art?"
Representation - - - - - - - - - Abstraction
John Ruskin + James McNeill Whistler
- they disagree on the nature of aesthetic value.
- Greeks (Plato) Art is a representation/mirror of nature. Plato regarded works of art as a poor reflection/imitation of truth.
- Aristotle shared these view, but, more sympathetic view of its objects, they’re a completion of what was only partially realised in nature, insight into the universal essence of things.
The eye of the beholder
- Is beauty inherently in the objects it is ascribed to?
- realist vs anti-realist views.
- support: Kant’s universal validity: aesthetic judgements are based purely on our subjective responses and feelings; but so ingrained in human nature that they are universally valid… “any properly constituted human can share them”
The Institutional Theory
- widely discussed since 1970s…
- Works of art have that status by virtue, bestowed upon them by authorised members of the art world.
- Difficulties… influential, but uninformative, we want to know WHY.
Formalist approach to art in 20th century.
- line, colour _ other formal qualities were considered paramount.
- Form was elevated over content
- Paved the way for Abstractionism
- Another influential departure from representation: expressionism… Expressions of the artist’s subjective emotion and experience were regarded as the hallmark of true works of art.
Family Resemblance
- As with many of Socratic Dialogues, a question is posed to be defined… The problem is a lot of things we seem to know what they are but are unable to define it.
- ONE WAY OUT… Wittgenstein: family resemblance. “games” we can easily give examples of games, but trouble arises when we try and find a definition that encompasses every instance. NO COMMON DENOMINATOR.
- so for art, pieces might have much in common with other pieces, but if we look for features they all possess, we will search in vain.
"any attempt to define art is misconceived and doomed to failure"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)