scholarly journals Aesthetics Qua Excess: Mario Perniola and Jacques Rancière

2019 ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Erik Vogt
Keyword(s):  
Critical Distance ◽  
Jacques Ranciere ◽  
Popular Art ◽  
The Arts ◽  
Jacques Rancière ◽  
Specific Object ◽  
Specific Order ◽  
Education Science ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Culture Education

According to Jacques Rancière, the contemporary anti-aesthetic consensus has denounced aesthetics “as the perverse discourse which bars this encounter and which subjects works, or our appreciation thereof, to a machine of thought conceived for other ends: the philosophical absolute, the religion of the poem or the dream of social emancipation” (Rancière, Aesthetics and Its Discontents, 2009: 2). However, what seems to be the most problematic trait of aesthetics is its excessive confusion of “pure thought, sensible affects and artistic practices.”But for both Rancière and Mario Perniola, the excess of aesthetics, that is, its confusion and obliteration of the borders between the arts, between high art and popular art, as well as between art and life – a commixture not to be mistaken for some postmodern transgression of modernist boundaries, for both Rancière and Perniola keep critical distance to the notions of modernism and postmodernism – constitutes the very knot “by which thoughts, practices and affects are instituted and assigned a territory or a ‘specific’ object” (Rancière, Aesthetics and Its Discontents, 2009: 4).This paper will demonstrate that aesthetics in Rancière and Perniola represents neither simply a general art theory nor a theory defining art by means of its effects on the senses, but rather a specific order of the identification and thinking of art. Moreover, it will argue that Rancière’s and Perniola’s respective elaborations of the relationship between aesthetics and art occur in the larger context of a primary aesthetics associated with the topographical analysis of the means in which the sensible, common world is constructed, parceled out and contested. It will also be shown that primary aesthetics, for both Rancière and Perniola, includes non-artistic realms and practices such as politics, culture, education, science, and economy in that all these realms and practices presuppose the sensible configuration of a specific world. Thus, primary aesthetics is ultimately to be grasped as distribution of the sensible (Rancière) or as sensology (Perniola) that determines not only that which is given in a common manner, but also – and more specifically – that which can be seen, felt, said or done and at the same time modes of seeing, feeling, saying or doing that are excluded from that which is given in a common manner. Article received: April 17, 2019; Article accepted: July 6, 2019; Published online: October 2019; Original scholarly paperHow to cite this article: Vogt, Erik. "Aesthetics Qua Excess: Mario Perniola and Jacques Rancière." AM Journal of Art and Media Studies 20 (2019): 1-10. doi: 10.25038/am.v0i20.320

Are Puns Mere? Christine Brooke-Rose's Amalgamemnon

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 529-545
Author(s):  
Julia Jordan
Keyword(s):  
The Novel ◽  
Late Modernism ◽  
Distinctive Character ◽  
Avant Garde ◽  
Jacques Ranciere ◽  
Jacques Rancière ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Secret Knowledge ◽  
The Relationship

This article will explore the relationship between linguistic puns and knowledge, in particular puns in Christine Brooke-Rose's work, and what they tell us about knowledge: secret knowledge; encoded knowledge; latent knowledge that remains latent; and the refusal of knowledge. My title is an allusion to Frank Kermode's 1967 essay ‘Objects, Jokes, and Art’, where he puzzles away at his own difficulty with distinguishing avant garde writing and art, especially what he calls the ‘neo-avant garde’ of the 60s, from jokes. ‘I myself believe’, he writes anxiously, ‘that there is a difference between art and a joke’, admitting that ‘it has sometimes been difficult to tell.’ Brooke-Rose, whose work Kermode admired, is a perfect example of this. Her texts revolve around the pun, the surprise juxtaposition between semantic poles, the unexpected yoking together of disparate elements. Puns, for Brooke-Rose, sit at the juncture between the accidental and the overdetermined. So what is funny about the pun? Not much, I propose, or rather, it provokes a particular sort of ambivalent laughter which becomes folded into the distinctive character and affective potency of late modernism itself: its deadpan silliness; its proclivity to collision and violence; its excitability and its melancholy. Brooke-Rose's humour is thus of the difficult sort, that is, humour that reveals itself at the moment of its operation to be not all that funny. The unsettling laughter, I propose, that exposes literature's own incommensurability with itself. For Jacques Rancière, the novel must illuminate somehow the ‘punctuation of the encounter with the inconceivable’, in the face of which all is reduced to passivity. The pun, in particular, forces the readers’ passivity, and exposes us to limits of what can be known.

Fictioning disagreement: The construction of separation in the work of Jacques Rancière

Maska ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (185) ◽  
pp. 64-74
Author(s):  
Bruno Besana
Keyword(s):  
Art And Politics ◽  
Jacques Ranciere ◽  
Natural Modes ◽  
The Arts ◽  
Key Concepts ◽  
Jacques Rancière ◽  
The Subject ◽  
New Form

Although constantly intertwining aesthetic and political considerations, the work of Rancière also forcefully stresses the absence of any evidence in the relation between art and politics. The article uses the theme of this lack of self-evident relation in order to analyse a series of key-concepts of Rancière’s work (regime, contrariété, disagreement, etc.) and, lastly, proposes to read through this reconstruction of its conceptual architecture the place – both conceptual and practical – where a subject can be thought and produced. In this sense, this article proposes to read in Rancière’s work the presence of a structured concept of the subject, the very determination of which is inseparable from the – at once collective and singular – articulation of a space of indetermination and fracture: a space articulating the absence of relation between different modes of interruption of evidences, taking place in the arts and in politics. In this way, Rancière’s work contributes to thinking the subject as groundless, irrelative to any given, specific reality (such as, for instance, ‘humanity’), as a new form connecting together, via a radically new narrative, a series of fractures operated within received, allegedly ‘natural’ modes of classifications of reality.

scholarly journals Reflexões sobre a avaliação final de uma disciplina eletiva - Reflections on the final evaluation of a discipline elective

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (10) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Fellipe Eloy Teixeira Albuquerque
Keyword(s):  
Martin Heidegger ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Final Evaluation ◽  
Alain Badiou ◽  
Jacques Ranciere ◽  
Peter Greenaway ◽  
Jacques Rancière ◽  
History Of ◽  
Art Philosophy ◽  
The Relationship

Com carga horária de 60 horas a disciplina eletiva do curso de Mestrado Acadêmico em História da Arte, da Unifesp - campus de Guarulhos, possibilitou muitas questões acerca de como a relação entre Arte e Filosofia foram apreendidas durante a História. A consulta de diversos autores como Alain Badiou, Martin Heidegger, Giorgio Agambem e Jacques Rancière ajudaram na compreensão desse processo, assim como a produção artística de propositores como Vik Muniz, Peter Greenaway e Ngwenya. Para a avaliação final desta disciplina os professores responsáveis solicitam a elaboração de um texto que, a partir das referências trabalhadas em aula, ajudassem o aluno a formular um conceito de Arte. Esse artigo vem reunir as principais reflexões levantadas durante todo o processo de avaliação da disciplina que conceituou uma possibilidade de entender a História da ArtePalavras-chave: avaliação, arte, filosofia. REFLECTIONS ON THE FINAL EVALUATION OF A DISCIPLINE ELECTIVEAbstractWith a workload of 60 hours to elective Academic Master's course in History of Art, Unifesp - Campus Guarulhos, enabled many questions about how the relationship between Art and Philosophy were seized during history. Consultation of various authors such as Alain Badiou, Martin Heidegger, Giorgio Agambem and Jacques Rancière helped in understanding this process, as well as the artistic production of proposers as Vik Muniz, Peter Greenaway and Ngwenya. For the final evaluation of this discipline the responsible teachers requested the preparation of a text which, from references worked in class, help the student to formulate a concept of Art. This article is to bring together the main reflections raised during the evaluation process of discipline that conceptualized a chance to understand the History of Art.Key-words: evaluation, art, philosophy.

scholarly journals Sørejser og historiografisk politik - Britisk historiefortælling om havet og dets folk

2018 ◽  
pp. 106-118
Author(s):  
Johan Heinesen
Keyword(s):  
Historical Science ◽  
Political Issue ◽  
Jacques Ranciere ◽  
Jacques Rancière ◽  
The Common ◽  
The Relationship

The article traces ways in which the historiography of British voyaging and exploration has configured the relationship between shipboard communities and words. This is argued to be a ‘political’ issue in the sense bestowed upon the word by Jacques Rancière. He sees the kernel of politics to be the struggle about speech and the ability of speaking beings to designate what is ‘common’ to community. Taking its clues from Rancière’s poetics of knowledge the article explores how historiography has dealt with the ship’s community of speaking beings. It identifies a strategy through which the narration of the ship distinguishes between good speech and bad speech and lets the former be the foundation of a proper community, while the later becomes a transgression of the boundaries of community. Historical science later supplemented this displacement of speech by tying the truth of community to hidden structures, thereby disabling the actor’s ability to narrate the common.

Playing to Dissent: The Aesthetics and Politics of Playful Office Design

2017 ◽  
Vol 39 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 297-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Alexandersson ◽  
Viktorija Kalonaityte
Keyword(s):  
Social Order ◽  
Working Life ◽  
Wage Labor ◽  
Aesthetics And Politics ◽  
Office Design ◽  
Jacques Ranciere ◽  
The Social ◽  
Jacques Rancière ◽  
The Relationship

In this article we develop the analysis and the conceptualization of the relationship between play and work within the increasingly aestheticized working life, drawing on the scholarship of Jacques Rancière and using images of playful office interiors as our empirical case. In doing so, we are able to add to the theorization of the uneasy relationship between the subordination of employee imagination and self to the agendas of the employer, typical of wage labor, and the strive for heteronomy and refiguring of the social order, characteristic of play.

‘You ought not to be obsessed with the idea that you have to intervene on every subject at every moment’: Interview with Jacques Rancière

Maska ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (185) ◽  
pp. 98-104
Author(s):  
Pia Brezavšček ◽  
Saška Rakef Perko
Keyword(s):  
Contemporary Society ◽  
Jacques Ranciere ◽  
Jacques Rancière ◽  
The Aesthetic ◽  
The Relationship

For the conference The Aesthetic Regime of Art: Dimensions of Rancière’s Theory, organised by Maska, Radio Ars commissioned an interview with Jacques Rancière. The conversation focused on topics such as the relationship between politics and aesthetics, and the genesis of Rancière’s thinking, which has recently focused on aesthetics beyond the notion of beauty. We discussed the role of art in contemporary society and the accusations of its hermeticity. And we tackled the idea of communism for present times. In contrast with other star intellectuals, Rancière expresses reservations about the constant need for intellectuals to provide opinions on all subject-matters and events.

Freiheit, Gleichheit, Sinnlichkeit–Jacques Rancière, Hegel und die holländische Malerei

2010 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Leander Scholz
Keyword(s):  
Political Theory ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Jacques Derrida ◽  
Traditional Concept ◽  
Jacques Ranciere ◽  
Jacques Rancière ◽  
Political Intervention ◽  
The French Revolution

Der Aufsatz geht der These nach, daß die Fundierung der politischen Theorie in einer ästhetischen Theorie bei Jacques Rancière eine Aktualisierung der Losung der Brüderlichkeit aus der Französischen Revolution darstellt. Diese Aktualisierung der Brüderlichkeit als »ästhetische Gemeinschaft« erlaubt es Rancière, an den Klassenbegriff von Marx anzuschließen, ohne die damit verbundene Gemeinschaftserfahrung begrifflich bestimmen und damit an positive Merkmale binden zu müssen. Weil Rancière seine Demokratietheorie vor allem als eine Interventionstheorie angelegt hat, soll die »ästhetische Gemeinschaft« im Unterschied zum Klassenbegriff es ermöglichen, eine prinzipiell unabgeschlossene Reihe von politischen Subjektivierungsprozessen zu denken. Um diese These zu schärfen, wird Rancières Demokratietheorie mit der von Jacques Derrida verglichen, der auf ganz ähnliche Weise das Demokratische der Demokratie in einem Streit gegeben sieht, der jenseits von demokratischen Spielregeln stattfindet, die Losung der Brüderlichkeit jedoch für überaus problematisch hält.<br><br>This article argues that the foundation of political theory in aesthetics by Jacques Rancière can be seen as an actualization of the slogan of fraternalism during the French Revolution. This actualization of fraternalism as »aesthetic community« gives Rancière the possibility to operate with the Marxian concept of classes without positively defining the experience of community. Because Rancière understands democracy as the chance for political intervention, the concept of an »aesthetic community« (as opposed to the traditional concept of classes) allows him to posit an endless process of political subjectification. To sharpen this argument, the article compares Rancière’s understanding of democracy to Jacques Derrida’s, who also focuses on a democratic struggle beyond democratic rules, but is very skeptical about the slogan of fraternalism.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document