Cluster account for the art: pro et contra

Authors

  • Artem E. Radeev Saint Petersburg State University

Abstract

This article examines one of the main approaches to art in contemporary art theory — a cluster account for the art. It describes the historical and theoretical contexts that shaped the emergence of the account and identifies its key points. The author refers to some lines in aesthetics (Kant and Hegel’s) and the lines marks the diversity of approaches to art in the XIX–XX centuries. Apart from that, it brings attention to the three traditions of art perception or perspectives in the theory of art — academic, philosophical and curatorial. The separation into these three traditions influenced the edifice of cluster account of art. The author suggests taking into consideration the general and the particular cluster account for art, explaining in what sense we can speak of art as a cluster concept. A special attention is paid to arguments for and against the account. The author comes to the conclusion that the account has its own area of application in the modern art scene, emphasizing the importance of this account to support the idea of multiplicity in contemporary art practices.

Keywords:

cluster, art, theory of art, aesthetics, B. Gaut

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Artem E. Radeev, Saint Petersburg State University

Associate Professor of the Department of Aesthetics and Philosophy of Culture, doctoral student

References

Литература

1. Gaut В. «Art» as a Cluster Concept // Theories of Art Today / ed. by N. Carroll. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 2000. P. 25–44.

2. Gaut B. The Cluster Account of Art Defended // British Journal of Aesthetics. 2005. N 45 (3). P. 273–288.

3. Adajian Th. On the Cluster Account of Art // British Journal of Aesthetics. 2003. N 43 (4). P. 379–385.

4. Tillinghast L. Essence and Anti-essentialism about Art // British Journal of Aesthetics. 2004. № 44 (2). P. 167–183.

5. Davies S. The Cluster Theory of Art // British Journal of Aesthetics. 2004. N 44 (3). P. 297–300.

6. Mclver Lopes D. Art Without «Art» // British Journal of Aesthetics. 2007. N 47 (1). P. 10–15.

7. Matravers D. Institutional Definitions and Reasons // British Journal of Aesthetics. 2007. N 47 (3). P. 251–257.

8. Meskin A. The Cluster Account of Art Reconsidered // British Journal of Aesthetics. 2007. N 47 (4). P. 388–400.

9. Lungworth F., Scarantino A. The Disjunctive Theory of Art: The Cluster Account Reformulated // British Journal of Aesthetics. 2010. N 50 (2). P. 151–167.

10. Livingston P. Art and Intention: A Philosophical Study. Oxford Press, 2005.

11. Button D. A Naturalist Definition of Art // The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. 2006. N 64 (3). P. 367–377.

12. Эстетика без искусства? Перспективы развития: сборник статей / отв.ред. Н. В. Голик. СПб.: Санкт-Петербургское философское общество, 2010. 352 с.

13. Витгенштейн Л. Философские работы. М.: Гнозис, 1994. Ч. 1. 612 с.

14. Вейц М. Роль теории в эстетике // Американская философия искусства: основные концепции второй половины XX века. Антология / под ред. Б. Дземидока и Б. Орлова. Екатеринбург: Деловая книга, 1997. С. 43–60.


References

1. Gaut V. "Art" as a Cluster Concept. Theories of Art Today. Ed. by N. Carroll. Madison, University of Wisconsin Press, 2000, pp. 25–44.

2. Gaut B. The Cluster Account of Art Defended. British Journal of Aesthetics, 2005, no. 45 (3), pp. 273–288.

3. Adajian Th. On the Cluster Account of Art. British Journal of Aesthetics, 2003, no. 43 (4), pp. 379–385.

4. Tillinghast L. Essence and Anti-essentialism about Art. British Journal of Aesthetics, 2004, no. 44 (2), pp. 167–183.

5. Davies S. The Cluster Theory of Art. British Journal of Aesthetics, 2004, no. 44 (3), pp. 297–300.

6. Mclver Lopes D. Art Without "Art". British Journal of Aesthetics, 2007, no. 47 (1), pp. 10–15.

7. Matravers D. Institutional Definitions and Reasons. British Journal of Aesthetics, 2007, no. 47 (3), pp. 251–257.

8. Meskin A. The Cluster Account of Art Reconsidered. British Journal of Aesthetics, 2007, no. 47 (4), pp. 388–400.

9. Lungworth F., Scarantino A. The Disjunctive Theory of Art: The Cluster Account Reformulated. British Journal of Aesthetics, 2010, no. 50 (2), pp. 151–167.

10. Livingston P. Art and Intention: A Philosophical Study. Oxford Press, 2005.

11. Button D. A Naturalist Definition of Art. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 2006, no. 64 (3), pp. 367–377.

12. Estetika bez iskusstva? Perspektivy razvitiia: sbornik statei. Ed. by N. V. Golik. St. Petersburg, Sankt-Peterburgskoe filosofskoe obshchestvo Publ., 2010. 352 p. (In Russian)

13. Vitgenshtein L. Filosofskie raboty. Moscow, Gnozis Publ., 1994, pt. 1. 612 p. (In Russian)

14. Veits M. Rol' teorii v estetike. Amerikanskaia filosofiia iskusstva: osnovnye kontseptsii vtoroi poloviny XX veka. Antologiia. Ed. by B. Dzemidok and B. Orlov. Ekaterinburg: Delovaia kniga Publ., 1997, pp. 43–60. (In Russian)

Published

2014-03-18

How to Cite

Radeev, A. E. . (2014). Cluster account for the art: pro et contra. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Arts, 4(1), 117–125. Retrieved from https://artsjournal.spbu.ru/article/view/4460

Issue

Section

Visual arts