explorations of relationalism

from http://bjaesthetics.oxfordjournals.org/content/47/3/280.abstract
Family Resemblances, Relationalism, and the Meaning of ‘Art’

1. Daniel A. Kaufman , + Author Affiliations

1. Daniel A. Kaufman, Department of Philosophy, Missouri State University, USA.  Email: danielkaufman@missouristate.edu 

 Abstract

Peter Kivy has maintained that the Wittgensteinian account of ‘art’ ‘is not a going concern’ and that ‘the traditional task of defining the work of art is back in fashion, with a vengeance’. This is true, in large part, because of the turn towards relational definitions of ‘art’ taken by philosophers in the 1960s; a move that is widely believed to have countered the Wittgensteinian charge that ‘art’ is an open concept and which gave rise to a ‘New Wave’ in aesthetic theorizing. So successful has this New Wave been that today the philosophy of art is awash with relational definitions, which are increasingly characterized by their technical sophistication and logical complexity. The aim of this essay is to oppose this trend; to demonstrate that relationalist definitions cannot avoid the problems which provided the impetus for the Wittgensteinian view and to show that the New Wavers cannot explain why anyone would want the definitions which they are offering, irrespective of their success or failure. I will also explore, in detail, the uses, as well as the limitations, of the Wittgensteinian approach to the concept of art.

• © British Society of Aesthetics 2007 also from http://theexposureproject.blogspot.com/2009/07/relational-art-is-it-ism.html

Relational Art: Is It An Ism?

In 2004, the BBC aired Relational Art: Is It An Ism?, a documentary exploring the movement (or trend, perhaps is more suitable a term) of Relational Aesthetics. As the title suggests, the documentary's director Ben Lewis quests to discover whether this fascinating, and often confounding, tendency in contemporary art possesses the subscribed theoretical and ideological practices necessary to deem it "the first Ism of the 21st century." Although perhaps designed to compartmentalize the emergence of this new trend, Lewis' investigation is nevertheless an interesting one. What's even more interesting, however, is the pronounced aloofness, evasiveness and even condescension that Lewis is met with when interviewing various Relational artists.

This quote from Nicolas Bourriaud's book Relational Aesthetics begins to clarify the ideas behind Relational Art: "The possibility of a relational art (an art taking as its theoretical horizon the realm of human interactions and its social context, rather than the assertion of an independent and private symbolic space), points to a radical upheaval of the aesthetic, cultural and political goals introduced by modern art."
video link

"Relational Art: Is It An Ism?" (2004) © The BBC

Posted by The Exposure Project at 6:50 PM Labels: Reflections, Video