Search results
matter, but by focusing on the very materiality of the historical event and its after effects, they in turn produce and create new intersections among time, space and matter’.45 She reminds us of Jacques Rancière’s notion of ‘a suitable political work of art’, one that works by ‘disrupting the relationship between the visible, the sayable, and the thinkable’.46 The film, then, doesn’t just show us evidence and present information, as other forms of documentary do. Instead, it induces new ways of seeing, and as such, can be seen as a politics, in Rancière’s terms. Ruiz
in art theory or in the philosophy of art. Instead, I interpret aesthetics in a broader sense, one first proposed by Jacques Rancière, as ‘a specific regime for identifying and reflecting on the arts: a mode of articulation between ways of doing and making, their corresponding modes of visibility, and possible ways of thinking about their relationships’.3 This new aesthetics came to replace the Stalinist regime of arts, which, following Rancière, can be deemed representative, that is, it adhered to a hierarchy of genres and subject matter and privileged speech over
: Persons and Politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2011. 15 Frantz Fanon, Black Skin, White Masks. Translated by Charles Lam Markmann. London: Pluto, 1986: 109. 16 Stultification is Jacques Rancière’s term: Jacques Rancière, The Ignorant Schoolmaster: Five Lessons in Intellectual Emancipation. Translated by Kristin Ross. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1991. EDKINS 9781526119032 PRINT.indd 11 22/02/2019 08:34
exemplarity to remind us that, for moral perfectionism, the act of interpreting is prioritized over the interpretation. By, then, reading this claim alongside the work of Jacques Rancière, I will emphasize his claim that spectators are always already engaged in such interpretation, but too often do not trust the legitimacy or authority of their own interpretation over that of others
be, in the face of attempts to interpellate her as a coherent ‘subject’. She refuses to misrecognise herself as ‘like’ the other woman, but she shows up at the party anyway. Interpellation is the process of ‘hailing’ whereby ‘concrete individuals’ are transformed into subjects. Louis Althusser’s famous example is the ‘Hey, you there!’ uttered by a policeman.30 When we recognise ourselves in the officer’s call and turn round, we are interpellated into a particular subject position: we become subjects of the police order, in Jacques Rancière’s terms.31 Interpellation
. Although the immediate focus of the essay is M. Cavell, the larger target is the general Enlightenment position, revived today in more than one quarter (e.g., William Connolly, Richard Rorty, Robert Pippin, Jacques Rancière) that popular film can serve to instruct us in democracy. Indeed, perhaps here is the place to re-emphasize that I criticize Cavell not because I think he is the
members themselves. I ask that we, as readers– spectators of the argument, become more attentive to the dancing bodies that have interrupted and transfigured our symbolic frameworks across 4 4 Dance and politics space and time. I have constructed my conceptual framework from a choreographic, critical reading of Jacques Rancière’s concept of dissensus. Rancière sees the essence of politics ‘as the manifestation of dissensus as the presence of two worlds in one’ (Rancière 2010: 37). Dissensus is the collision of two worlds, one intervening in the other and
, turning on collective mentalities and anonymous forces in the unfolding of the past. Yet such readings ignore Michelet’s actual procedures of research and writing, which arguably recast both “hermeneutic” and “scientific” methods in order to create a genuinely “modernist” historical scholarship. Michelet’s history writing, Jacques Rancière has argued, brought to the fore the salient but repressed
The major part of this book project was funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 700913.
This book is about two distinct but related professional cultures in late Soviet
Russia that were concerned with material objects: industrial design and
decorative art. The Russian avant-garde of the 1920s is broadly recognised to
have been Russia’s first truly original contribution to world culture. In
contrast, Soviet design of the post-war period is often dismissed as hackwork
and plagiarism that resulted in a shabby world of commodities. This book
identifies the second historical attempt at creating a powerful alternative to
capitalist commodities in the Cold War era. It offers a new perspective on the
history of Soviet material culture by focusing on the notion of the ‘comradely
object’ as an agent of progressive social relations that state-sponsored Soviet
design inherited from the avant-garde. It introduces a shared history of
domestic objects, handmade as well as machine-made, mass-produced as well as
unique, utilitarian as well as challenging the conventional notion of utility.
Situated at the intersection of intellectual history, social history and
material culture studies, this book elucidates the complexities and
contradictions of Soviet design that echoed international tendencies of the late
twentieth century. The book is addressed to design historians, art historians,
scholars of material culture, historians of Russia and the USSR, as well as
museum and gallery curators, artists and designers, and the broader public
interested in modern aesthetics, art and design, and/or the legacy of socialist
regimes.
Giraud, Le murmure des plantes, web, https://fr.ulule. com/murmure/ (created December 2012, last accessed November 2017). 9 The nature of that participation varies from one practice to the next, and the politics of participation are (of course) contested. See Bishop, Artificial Hells; Claire Bishop, ed., Participation (London: Whitechapel Gallery, 2006); Grant Kester, The One and the Many: Contemporary Collaborative Art in a Global Context (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2011); Jacques Rancière, The Emancipated Spectator (London: Verso, 2011); and Gareth White