{"id":656,"date":"2014-06-08T15:20:16","date_gmt":"2014-06-08T13:20:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lecture.jose-marcio.org\/blog\/?p=656"},"modified":"2020-12-29T11:00:01","modified_gmt":"2020-12-29T10:00:01","slug":"dominic-mciver-lopes-beyond-art","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lecture.jose-marcio.org\/blog\/2014\/06\/08\/dominic-mciver-lopes-beyond-art\/","title":{"rendered":"Dominic McIver Lopes, \u00ab\u00a0Beyond Art\u00a0\u00bb"},"content":{"rendered":"

Une d\u00e9marche logique en art.<\/h2>\n

\"\"L’\u00e9ternelle question : \u00ab\u00a0L’art, c’est quoi ? Comment dire si une certaine cr\u00e9ation appartient \u00e0 la classe des \u0153uvres d’art ou pas ?\u00a0\u00bb<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n

L’auteur suit une d\u00e9marche qui me semble relever d’une logique d\u00e9ductive : des ensembles d’objets d’art, des techniques, si… alors … sinon… et parfois on a l’impression qu’on se trouve dans un contexte de d\u00e9monstration d’un th\u00e9or\u00e8me. Et cela rend le raisonnement parfois difficile \u00e0 suivre.<\/p>\n

Aussi, je me pose des questions sur la m\u00e9thode. Depuis l’antiquit\u00e9 on se demande ce que c’est l’art et le manque de consensus ne fait qu’augmenter dans les derni\u00e8res d\u00e9cennies, surtout apr\u00e8s l’av\u00e8nement de l’art contemporain. Dans un domaine o\u00f9 on s’efforce \u00e0 dire que l’art peut \u00eatre tout sauf une science exacte, peut-on arriver \u00e0 la d\u00e9finir avec une m\u00e9thode logique ?<\/p>\n

Sans contester l’exercice (je n’ai m\u00eame pas de connaissance suffisante dans le domaine de l’art) je pense que la question n’a toujours pas de r\u00e9ponse. Et c’est s\u00fbrement ce qui justifie le titre : \u00ab\u00a0Beyond Art\u00a0\u00bb.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

N\u00e9anmoins, je consid\u00e8re la lecture de ce livre utile, ce n’est que pour juste savoir que quelqu’un a pris ce chemin de raisonnement sur une d\u00e9finition de l’art. C’est d\u00e9j\u00e0 une information int\u00e9ressante.<\/p>\n

De ma part, je m’attache \u00e0 lire d’autres livres qui posent la m\u00eame question et de retenir ce qui me semble int\u00e9ressant dans chacun. Je cite mes derni\u00e8res lectures : \u00ab\u00a0What art is\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> de Arthur Danto, \u00ab\u00a0This is not art\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> de Alana Jelinek ou \u00ab\u00a0The art instinct\u00a0\u00bb<\/em> de Denis Dutto, …<\/p>\n

Quatri\u00e8me de couverture<\/h2>\n

Dominic McIver Lopes articulates and defends a ‘buck passing theory of art’, namely that a work of art is nothing but a work in one of the arts. Having traced philosophical interest in <\/em>theories of art to a reaction to certain puzzle cases of avant-garde art, he argues that none of the theories that have dominated philosophy since the 1960s adequately copes with these works. Whereas these theories have reached a dialectical impasse wherein they reiterate, and cannot resolve, disagreement over the puzzle cases, the buck passing theory illuminates the radical provocations of avant-garde art. In addition, when supplemented by a systematic framework for crafting theories of the individual arts, the buck passing theory grounds our empirical inquiries into the arts as well as our practices of appreciation and art criticism. Lopes seeks to model the diverse strategies employed by humanists and social and behavioural scientists who study the different arts. He gives the specificity of each art form a central role in our appreciative endeavours, and yet he stresses the continuity of the arts with similar, non-art activities such as fashion design, sports and games, cuisine, nature appreciation, and non-literary writing.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Une d\u00e9marche logique en art. L’\u00e9ternelle question : \u00ab\u00a0L’art, c’est quoi ? Comment dire si une certaine cr\u00e9ation appartient \u00e0 la classe des \u0153uvres d’art ou pas ?\u00a0\u00bb L’auteur suit une d\u00e9marche qui me semble relever d’une logique d\u00e9ductive :<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[20,17],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-656","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-art","category-lecture","comments-off"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lecture.jose-marcio.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/656","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lecture.jose-marcio.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lecture.jose-marcio.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lecture.jose-marcio.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lecture.jose-marcio.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=656"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/lecture.jose-marcio.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/656\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lecture.jose-marcio.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=656"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lecture.jose-marcio.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=656"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lecture.jose-marcio.org\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=656"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}