The thesis of this text is that the modernist paradigms of art —work of art, creation, and aesthetic experience—were reinterpreted by the Bauhaus idea of the Gestaltung of life. This unique conceptual foundation implied the theoretical and practical education meant to form ( gestalten) not only art and culture, but also life as a whole, as a dynamic organism consisting of two elements—the individual and the space of the individual existence. Bauhaus architecture and design of objects for everyday use were practiced as the Gestaltung of living space in a postwar world of industrial production. The practices of fine arts were developed to improve the human sensory potential and perceptive relations to space. Gestalt psychologists and the Bauhaus worked out the implications of two different meanings of Goethe’s original idea of the Gestalt. The Preliminary Course (Vorkurs) as well as the reflected-light compositions (Reflektorische Farbenlichtspiele), and the artistic solutions of László Moholy-Nagy and Oskar Schlemmer are considered as the concrete educational and artistic achievements of the Bauhaus Gestaltung.
{"title":"Bauhaus Gestaltung as a New Philosophy of Life","authors":"Sanela Nikolić","doi":"10.31664/zu.2020.106.04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31664/zu.2020.106.04","url":null,"abstract":"The thesis of this text is that the modernist paradigms of art —work of art, creation, and aesthetic experience—were reinterpreted by the Bauhaus idea of the Gestaltung of life. This unique conceptual foundation implied the theoretical and practical education meant to form ( gestalten) not only art and culture, but also life as a whole, as a dynamic organism consisting of two elements—the individual and the space of the individual existence. Bauhaus architecture and design of objects for everyday use were practiced as the Gestaltung of living space in a postwar world of industrial production. The practices of fine arts were developed to improve the human sensory potential and perceptive relations to space. Gestalt psychologists and the Bauhaus worked out the implications of two different meanings of Goethe’s original idea of the Gestalt. The Preliminary Course (Vorkurs) as well as the reflected-light compositions (Reflektorische Farbenlichtspiele), and the artistic solutions of László Moholy-Nagy and Oskar Schlemmer are considered as the concrete educational and artistic achievements of the Bauhaus Gestaltung.","PeriodicalId":41082,"journal":{"name":"Zivot Umjetnosti","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.31664/zu.2020.106.04","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47186719","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Madeleine, Madeleine i Madeleine","authors":"Ana Marija Habjan","doi":"10.31664/zu.2020.106.11","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31664/zu.2020.106.11","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":41082,"journal":{"name":"Zivot Umjetnosti","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2020-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69461990","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Digital Art History (DAH), which embraces massive datasets, innovative methodologies based on computational techniques, and collaborative paradigms, promises to offer new perspectives on the history of art. For example, DAH has the potential to shift the discipline’s focus from the traditional topics of inquiry to less explored aspects of the field—in short, to reposition the discipline’s central preoccupations with the issues of patronage, which are the concerns of the elite, to broader structures at work in a society, including the experiences of the marginalized. This displacement from center to periphery is not restricted to DAH research questions, but often applies to other aspects of DAH as well: to its status within the Digital Humanities (DH); to the demographic it frequently attracts; and to the infrastructure(s) developed to support it. Yet despite this potential, in many respects DAH occupies the periphery. This essay problematizes these issues as crystallized by the establishment of a digital art history lab at a privately funded library that serves the public, and explores one instance of how DAH has forced the North American academy to reflect further on the issues of privilege, access, and the future of art history.
{"title":"Digital Art History for the Masses? The Role of the Public Digital Art History Lab","authors":"Ellen Prokop","doi":"10.31664/zu.2019.105.09","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31664/zu.2019.105.09","url":null,"abstract":"Digital Art History (DAH), which embraces massive datasets, innovative methodologies based on computational techniques, and collaborative paradigms, promises to offer new perspectives on the history of art. For example, DAH has the potential to shift the discipline’s focus from the traditional topics of inquiry to less explored aspects of the field—in short, to reposition the discipline’s central preoccupations with the issues of patronage, which are the concerns of the elite, to broader structures at work in a society, including the experiences of the marginalized. This displacement from center to periphery is not restricted to DAH research questions, but often applies to other aspects of DAH as well: to its status within the Digital Humanities (DH); to the demographic it frequently attracts; and to the infrastructure(s) developed to support it. Yet despite this potential, in many respects DAH occupies the periphery. This essay problematizes these issues as crystallized by the establishment of a digital art history lab at a privately funded library that serves the public, and explores one instance of how DAH has forced the North American academy to reflect further on the issues of privilege, access, and the future of art history.","PeriodicalId":41082,"journal":{"name":"Zivot Umjetnosti","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.31664/zu.2019.105.09","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69461664","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
According to one of Marx’s classifications, human labour can be divided into productive and unproductive: productive labour produces and accumulates surplus value, while unproductive does not. In his analysis of the field theory, Pierre Bourdieu implied that, by its very existence, a work of art possesses value that generates the accumulation of capital on the market. In this sense, an artistic artefact is considered to be the result of productive labour. Bourdieu writes that, in the intellectual (artistic, scientific) field, priority is given to the symbolic capital, which can be converted into the economic one at any time. Although it is derived from Marx’s theses, Bourdieu’s concept of capital is not consistently based on the Marxist idea of the exploitation of surplus value. However, the French sociologist admits that all capital is essentially based on the economic one, because all other types of capital can be converted into the economic one, which brings Bourdieu’s theory back into the framework of Marxist economism. Fields are arenas in which participants clash over different types of capital, but they are also spaces of struggle for legitimacy and the right to monopolise. On the basis of insights into the relationships of gallerists, curators and critics with the work of artists belonging to the new artistic practice in Croatia in the late 1960s and 1970s, this article will examine the extent to which Marx’s theses on productive and unproductive labour correlate to Bourdieu’s concept of the artistic field and its capital, and how artistic products of the new artistic practice can justify their existence as products of productive labour.
{"title":"Umjetnost u službi generiranja viška vrijednosti – o umjetničkom djelu kao (specifičnom) obliku kapitala","authors":"Igor Loinjak","doi":"10.31664/zu.2019.104.09","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31664/zu.2019.104.09","url":null,"abstract":"According to one of Marx’s classifications, human labour can be divided into productive and unproductive: productive labour produces and accumulates surplus value, while unproductive does not. In his analysis of the field theory, Pierre Bourdieu implied that, by its very existence, a work of art possesses value that generates the accumulation of capital on the market. In this sense, an artistic artefact is considered to be the result of productive labour. Bourdieu writes that, in the intellectual (artistic, scientific) field, priority is given to the symbolic capital, which can be converted into the economic one at any time. Although it is derived from Marx’s theses, Bourdieu’s concept of capital is not consistently based on the Marxist idea of the exploitation of surplus value. However, the French sociologist admits that all capital is essentially based on the economic one, because all other types of capital can be converted into the economic one, which brings Bourdieu’s theory back into the framework of Marxist economism. Fields are arenas in which participants clash over different types of capital, but they are also spaces of struggle for legitimacy and the right to monopolise. On the basis of insights into the relationships of gallerists, curators and critics with the work of artists belonging to the new artistic practice in Croatia in the late 1960s and 1970s, this article will examine the extent to which Marx’s theses on productive and unproductive labour correlate to Bourdieu’s concept of the artistic field and its capital, and how artistic products of the new artistic practice can justify their existence as products of productive labour.","PeriodicalId":41082,"journal":{"name":"Zivot Umjetnosti","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.31664/zu.2019.104.09","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47530423","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
života u epohi antropocena, ili pak kako bismo imaginirali život u postantropocenu, motivirani su dvama temeljnim pojmovima: degrowth i unlearn. Dok je prvi nedavno (i pomalo nespretno) preveden kao „odrast”, drugi pojam uvriježen je u hrvatskom jeziku: „odučiti”. Ti pojmovi koji označavaju zaustavljanje, pa i mogućnost reverzibilnosti nekog procesa, baza su za modus operandi koji treba pokrenuti kako bi se zaustavila bezumna trka za profitom, ukorijenjena u mitologijama o povezanosti rasta proizvodnje i bruto nacionalnog dohotka s neizbježnim rastom potrošnje fosilnih goriva te navodnim boljitkom svakog pojedinca koji pristaje na takvu trku. Dok voze svoja motorna vozila koja bezočno gutaju benzin na svoja udaljena radna mjesta, pripadnici globalne srednje klase i tehnokracije svjesno zanemaruju činjenicu da globalne biopolitike „operiraju kao strateška igra u kojoj je princip rata asimiliran u samu potku društveno-ekonomskih i kulturnih mreža biopolitičkih odnosa”.1 Takvi biopolitički odnosi uvjetuju stanje „krajolika koje podrazumijeva stalno pokretanje zemlje i ostalih prirodnih resursa u vojne svrhe”, 2 to je sam „etos rata”, 3 odnosno „poredak običaja, civilizacije, misli, koji afirmiše rat, ne samo kao sredstvo jedne politike, nego i kao konsupstancijalni cilj ispoljavanja suverenosti, koji jedini ima izuzetno pravo”.4 → • Armina Pilav, Un-war prostor, Galerija Greta, Zagreb, 25. veljače – 2. ožujka 2019. DOI: 10.31664/zu.2019.104.12
人类新世时期的生活，或者为了想象后超越时代的生活，是由两个基本概念驱动的：退化和未学习。Dok je prvi nedavno（i pomalo nespretno）preveden kao“odrast”，drugi pojam uvriježen je u hrvatskom jeziku：“odučiti”。这些停止的概念，以及一个过程可逆性的可能性，是基于一种停止有意义的利润竞赛的运作模式，基于生产增长和国民总收入与化石燃料消耗不可避免增长的神话，据称对每个同意这种竞赛的人来说都更好。当他们在偏远的工作场所驾驶吞噬汽油的机动车辆时，全球中产阶级和技术阶级成员意识到，全球生物政策“是一种战略游戏，在这种游戏中，战争原则在生物政治关系的社会、经济和文化网络中被同化”，2是“精神战争”，3或“确认战争的习俗、文明和思想的秩序，不仅是一项政策的手段，而且是解决主权的一贯目标，这是唯一的例外权利”。2月-2日2019年3月。DOI:10.31664/zu.2019.104.12
{"title":"Un-learn, de-grow, un-war","authors":"Sonja Leboš","doi":"10.31664/ZU.2019.104.12","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31664/ZU.2019.104.12","url":null,"abstract":"života u epohi antropocena, ili pak kako bismo imaginirali život u postantropocenu, motivirani su dvama temeljnim pojmovima: degrowth i unlearn. Dok je prvi nedavno (i pomalo nespretno) preveden kao „odrast”, drugi pojam uvriježen je u hrvatskom jeziku: „odučiti”. Ti pojmovi koji označavaju zaustavljanje, pa i mogućnost reverzibilnosti nekog procesa, baza su za modus operandi koji treba pokrenuti kako bi se zaustavila bezumna trka za profitom, ukorijenjena u mitologijama o povezanosti rasta proizvodnje i bruto nacionalnog dohotka s neizbježnim rastom potrošnje fosilnih goriva te navodnim boljitkom svakog pojedinca koji pristaje na takvu trku. Dok voze svoja motorna vozila koja bezočno gutaju benzin na svoja udaljena radna mjesta, pripadnici globalne srednje klase i tehnokracije svjesno zanemaruju činjenicu da globalne biopolitike „operiraju kao strateška igra u kojoj je princip rata asimiliran u samu potku društveno-ekonomskih i kulturnih mreža biopolitičkih odnosa”.1 Takvi biopolitički odnosi uvjetuju stanje „krajolika koje podrazumijeva stalno pokretanje zemlje i ostalih prirodnih resursa u vojne svrhe”, 2 to je sam „etos rata”, 3 odnosno „poredak običaja, civilizacije, misli, koji afirmiše rat, ne samo kao sredstvo jedne politike, nego i kao konsupstancijalni cilj ispoljavanja suverenosti, koji jedini ima izuzetno pravo”.4 → • Armina Pilav, Un-war prostor, Galerija Greta, Zagreb, 25. veljače – 2. ožujka 2019. DOI: 10.31664/zu.2019.104.12","PeriodicalId":41082,"journal":{"name":"Zivot Umjetnosti","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"69461513","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper focuses on the ideological transformation of modernistic aesthetic fetishism into what Professor Rastko Močnik has termed “aesthetic imperialism” in contemporary art. Our hypothesis is that this transformation is an effect of the overdetermination of artistic production to fictitious capital. In order to examine this hypothesis, we shall explore the transformation of the simple, modernist work of art into the twofold, contemporary work of art (which must first be a claim to aesthetic evaluation and only then a work of art). We do not suggest that modernism did not know the term “artwork,” as applying to those art products that were not recognized as works of art, but rather that there was a change in the very process of aesthetic evaluation. We believe that, unlike the unitary modernist recognition of products as works by the institution of art, there is twofold recognition in the contemporary age. Here the claim to aesthetic evaluation is allowed to every product, but confirmed only to those that successfully reproduce the ruling “aesthetic imperialism.” Even though ideologists of contemporary art present this change as a result of progressivism that is inherent to the institution of art, we would like to argue that it is an effect of the abovementioned overdetermination of artistic production by fictitious capital, that is, its effects in aesthetic and legal fetishism. This hypothesis will be examined in two relatively autonomous instances: economic and ideological (artistic).
本文关注的是现代主义审美拜物教在当代艺术中的意识形态转变，即Rastko mo nik教授所说的“审美帝国主义”。我们的假设是，这种转变是艺术生产对虚拟资本的过度决定的影响。为了检验这一假设，我们将探讨简单的现代主义艺术作品向双重的当代艺术作品的转变(这必须首先是对审美评价的要求，然后才是艺术作品)。我们并不是说现代主义不知道“艺术品”这个词，因为它适用于那些不被认为是艺术作品的艺术产品，而是说在审美评价的过程中发生了变化。我们认为，与现代主义对产品作为艺术机构作品的单一认可不同，当代存在着双重认可。在这里，每一种产品都可以要求审美评价，但只有那些成功地复制了占统治地位的“审美帝国主义”的产品才可以得到证实。尽管当代艺术的意识形态家将这种变化视为艺术制度固有的进步主义的结果，但我们愿意认为，这是上述虚构资本对艺术生产的过度决定的结果，也就是说，它在审美和法律拜物教中的影响。这一假设将在两个相对独立的实例中进行检验:经济和意识形态(艺术)。
{"title":"Između proizvoda i dela: estetski fetišizam i finansijalizacija umetnosti","authors":"M. Đorđević","doi":"10.31664/ZU.2019.104.05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31664/ZU.2019.104.05","url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on the ideological transformation of modernistic aesthetic fetishism into what Professor Rastko Močnik has termed “aesthetic imperialism” in contemporary art. Our hypothesis is that this transformation is an effect of the overdetermination of artistic production to fictitious capital. In order to examine this hypothesis, we shall explore the transformation of the simple, modernist work of art into the twofold, contemporary work of art (which must first be a claim to aesthetic evaluation and only then a work of art). We do not suggest that modernism did not know the term “artwork,” as applying to those art products that were not recognized as works of art, but rather that there was a change in the very process of aesthetic evaluation. We believe that, unlike the unitary modernist recognition of products as works by the institution of art, there is twofold recognition in the contemporary age. Here the claim to aesthetic evaluation is allowed to every product, but confirmed only to those that successfully reproduce the ruling “aesthetic imperialism.” Even though ideologists of contemporary art present this change as a result of progressivism that is inherent to the institution of art, we would like to argue that it is an effect of the abovementioned overdetermination of artistic production by fictitious capital, that is, its effects in aesthetic and legal fetishism. This hypothesis will be examined in two relatively autonomous instances: economic and ideological (artistic).","PeriodicalId":41082,"journal":{"name":"Zivot Umjetnosti","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.31664/ZU.2019.104.05","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48001110","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：