JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM最新文献

英文中文

Contributors 贡献者

IF 0.8 2区艺术学 0 ART

JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM

Pub Date : 2020-11-09 DOI: 10.1111/jaac.12769

引用次数: 0

Improvisation and Stand-Up Comedy 即兴表演和单口喜剧

IF 0.8 2区艺术学 0 ART

JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM

Pub Date : 2020-11-09 DOI: 10.1111/jaac.12754

TOBYN DEMARCO

In this article, I investigate the ways in which improvisation occurs and works in stand-up comedy. I introduce a continuum model of composing and improvising and for understanding and classifying generative and nongenerative performances. The model reflects the fact that cognitive neuroscience research on creativity and improvisation provides evidence for the claim that composing and improvising are two species of the same genus (selective creation), and the differences between generative and nongenerative performance are not categorical but vague, admitting of a continuum model. The model is applied to standard cases of stand-up comedy to illuminate the specific ways in which improvisation and composition are present in stand-up comedy, and the ways in which stand-up comedy performances are mixtures of generative and nongenerative elements. In addition, I address some of the reasons why such understanding is important and useful.

在这篇文章中，我研究了即兴表演在单口喜剧中发生和发挥作用的方式。我介绍了一个连续的创作和即兴创作模型，以及对生成和非生成表演的理解和分类。该模型反映了一个事实，即认知神经科学对创造力和即兴创作的研究为作曲和即兴创作是同一属(选择性创作)的两个物种的主张提供了证据，并且生成和非生成表演之间的差异不是明确的，而是模糊的，承认一个连续体模型。将该模型应用于单口喜剧的标准案例，以阐明在单口喜剧中即兴创作和作曲的具体方式，以及单口喜剧表演是生成元素和非生成元素混合的方式。此外，我还阐述了为什么这种理解是重要和有用的一些原因。

引用次数: 1

Introduction: Stand-Up Comedy Today and Tomorrow 简介:单口喜剧的今天和明天

IF 0.8 2区艺术学 0 ART

JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM

Pub Date : 2020-11-09 DOI: 10.1111/jaac.12759

SHEILA LINTOTT

引用次数: 1

Jackson, , , Lauren Michele. White Negroes: When Cornrows Were in Vogue… and Other Thoughts on Cultural Appropriation. Boston: Beacon Press, 2019, 184 pp., $25.95 cloth. 杰克逊，劳伦·米歇尔。白人黑人:当玉米辫流行的时候……以及对文化挪用的其他思考。波士顿:灯塔出版社，2019年，184页，25.95美元。

IF 0.8 2区艺术学 0 ART

JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM

Pub Date : 2020-08-13 DOI: 10.1111/jaac.12753

MARIE HADLEY

引用次数: 1

Learning from Aesthetic Disagreement and Flawed Artworks 从审美分歧和有缺陷的艺术作品中学习

IF 0.8 2区艺术学 0 ART

JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM

Pub Date : 2020-08-13 DOI: 10.1111/jaac.12748

EILEEN JOHN

Disagreements about art are considered here for their potential to pose questions about reality beyond the artwork. The project of assessing artistic value is useful for bringing complex questions to light. The ambitiousness of the cognitive stock, in Richard Wollheim's term, that can be relevant to understanding an artwork may mean that confident evaluation will elude us. Thinking about artistic value judgment in this way shifts its centrality as the point of artistic interpretation and evaluation; the goal of judging a work's meaning and value is a useful tool for prompting us to understand a work. But if we fail to reach that goal, that does not mean we have failed to engage with the work appropriately. The artistic value judgment, and achieving consensus on that value, can be secondary in importance to grasping the problems a work poses that are not immediately resolvable. Examples drawn from literary and philosophical imagining, in the work of Grace Paley and Mary Mothersill, and from Toni Morrison's literary criticism are used to illustrate and support the fruitfulness of this approach.

关于艺术的分歧在这里被考虑，因为它们有可能对艺术品之外的现实提出问题。评估艺术价值的项目有助于揭示复杂的问题。用理查德·沃尔海姆(Richard Wollheim)的话说，认知储备的野心可能与理解艺术品有关，这可能意味着自信的评估将远离我们。以这种方式思考艺术价值判断，使其成为艺术阐释和评价的中心点;判断作品的意义和价值的目标是促使我们理解作品的有用工具。但是，如果我们没有达到这个目标，这并不意味着我们没有适当地参与这项工作。对艺术价值的判断，以及对这一价值达成共识，对于把握一件作品所带来的不能立即解决的问题来说，可能是次要的。Grace Paley和Mary Mothersill的文学和哲学想象以及Toni Morrison的文学批评都被用来说明和支持这种方法的成果。

引用次数: 0

Carvalho, , , John. Thinking with Images: An Enactivist Aesthetics, New York: Routledge, 2019, x + 150 pp., 16 b&w images, $140.00 cloth. 卡瓦略，约翰。用图像思考:一种激进的美学，纽约:劳特利奇，2019,x + 150页，16张黑白图片，140.00美元布面。

IF 0.8 2区艺术学 0 ART

JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM

Pub Date : 2020-08-13 DOI: 10.1111/jaac.12752

SHERYL TUTTLE ROSS

引用次数: 0

Contributors 贡献者

IF 0.8 2区艺术学 0 ART

JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM

Pub Date : 2020-08-13 DOI: 10.1111/jaac.12751

引用次数: 0

Installation Art and the Question of Aesthetic Autonomy: Juliane Rebentisch and the Beholder's Share 装置艺术与审美自主性的问题:朱利安·雷庞蒂斯奇与观者的份额

IF 0.8 2区艺术学 0 ART

JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM

Pub Date : 2020-08-13 DOI: 10.1111/jaac.12735

KEN WILDER

Intermedial art, as it emerged in the 1960s and 1970s, constituted a threat not only to the medium specificity of modernism, but also to the artwork as self-contained autonomous object. That this threat was real is evidenced by the ubiquitous presence of installation art. While only named as such toward the end of this period, installation art––a label still rejected by some of its founding artists––is exemplary of such hybrid practices. Its supporters and critics drew a contrast between, on the one hand, modernism's aesthetic engagement with a medium-specific (and self-sufficient) “object,” and, on the other hand, new so-called nonaesthetic “practices” engaging the “literal” spectator within her own space, such that the space of the gallery or situation is drawn into the encounter. So, while in 1967, Michael Fried writes disparagingly of the notion that “someone has merely to enter the room in which a literalist work has been placed to become that beholder, that audience of one” (1998, 193), Claire Bishop echoes such a claim when she suggests that “an insistence on the literal presence of the viewer is arguably the key characteristic of installation art” (2005, 6). Despite diametrically opposed critical evaluations of such situated art, a curious consensus emerges around a beholder whose “share” is characterized as a “being present.”It is indicative because it allows us to see an interrelation “between the anti-objectivist impulse of theories of aesthetic experience and the impulses toward the dissolution of the concept of the work in artistic practice”; thus, the opposition toward objectivism in a philosopher like Rüdiger Bubner is at the same time a “reaction to the destruction of the traditional unity of the work in contemporary art,” exemplified, of course, by installation art (Rebentisch 2012, 10).The object is aesthetic not by virtue of qualities that precede the experience of such an object (that is, guaranteed by production), but only when the encounter with the artwork initiates a specifically aesthetic experience. This is not “a return to subjectivism that would sacrifice the art critical discourse and with it any consideration of questions of productions aesthetics” (130–131), but rather a recognition that art critical discourse necessarily follows aesthetic experience and is, thus, constitutive of such aesthetic objects through processes of reflective transformation.Through such discursivity, Rebentisch seeks to avoid the pitfalls of an objectivism conceived as self-referential, and a subjectivism that posits the subject's aesthetic experience as its own object. She defines the aesthetic experience of installation art as a relation that does, indeed, involve aesthetic distance, in that it “brackets” the object not just as a self-referential “thing,” but through an event-like experience: a bracketing that highlights the performative role of the

在20世纪60年代和70年代兴起的中间艺术，不仅对现代主义的媒介特殊性构成了威胁，而且对艺术作为独立自主的对象构成了威胁。无处不在的装置艺术证明了这种威胁是真实存在的。虽然装置艺术是在这一时期末期才被命名的，但它是这种混合实践的典范——这个标签仍然被一些创始艺术家所拒绝。它的支持者和批评者提出了一个对比，一方面，现代主义的审美与媒介特定的(和自给自足的)“对象”的接触，另一方面，新的所谓的非审美“实践”吸引了“字面上的”观众在她自己的空间里，这样的画廊或环境的空间被吸引到相遇中。因此，尽管在1967年，迈克尔·弗里德(Michael Fried)轻蔑地写道，“某人只需要进入放置文字主义作品的房间，就可以成为那个观察者，那个观众”(1998,193)，克莱尔·毕晓普(Claire Bishop)回应了这样的说法，她认为“坚持观众的文字存在可以说是装置艺术的关键特征”(2005,6)。尽管对这种定位艺术的批判性评价是完全相反的，一种奇怪的共识出现在一个观察者身上，他的“分享”被描述为“存在”。它之所以具有指示性，是因为它让我们看到了“美学经验理论的反客观主义冲动与艺术实践中作品概念消解的冲动之间的相互关系”;因此，像r<s:1>迪格·布纳(diger Bubner)这样的哲学家对客观主义的反对同时也是“对当代艺术作品传统统一性破坏的反应”，当然，装置艺术就是一个例证(Rebentisch 2012, 10)。对象的审美性不是由于其在体验这种对象之前的品质(也就是说，由生产保证)，而是只有当与艺术品的接触引发了一种特定的审美体验。这并不是“回归到主观主义，牺牲艺术批评话语及其对作品美学问题的任何考虑”(130-131)，而是承认艺术批评话语必然遵循审美经验，因此，通过反思性转化过程构成这些审美对象。通过这样的话语，Rebentisch试图避免被认为是自我参照的客观主义的陷阱，以及将主体的审美经验作为其自身对象的主观主义。她将装置艺术的审美体验定义为一种关系，这种关系确实涉及审美距离，因为它不仅将物体作为一种自我指涉的“事物”，而且通过一种类似事件的体验来“括号”:一种突出主体表演角色的括号。但在这里，极简主义/装置艺术揭示了所有艺术的结构方面，即“审美对象作为物和符号的双重和相互参照的存在，它的‘舞台存在’”(69)。这在表现者和被表现者之间构建了一种张力:弗里德通过声称审美对象的自给自足来拒绝这种张力，这种审美对象在其“瞬时”欣赏中克服了对观察者的任何依赖。因此，对于Rebentisch来说，装置艺术并没有违背“自主艺术的理念”，而是“对它的客观主义误解”(14)。Rebentisch的立场反驳了Osborne(2013)等人的观点，后者认为批判性参与的当代艺术从定义上来说是非审美的，甚至是反审美的。事实上，她更广泛的项目是“恢复哲学美学作为一个关键项目”(Rebentisch 2012, 16)。同时，她认为装置艺术代表了对语境独立艺术的意识形态拒绝。Rebentisch将审美自主性重新塑造，不是作为对象的自给自足，而是作为一种表象(一种从实践和理论理性领域中汲取的经验)，迫使我们面对我们遇到艺术作品时的伦理和政治状况。因此，装置艺术的情境性构成了作品的意义，同时又受制于否定行为。在这里，正如Chytry(2014, 469)在《美学与艺术批评杂志》(The Journal of Aesthetics And Art Criticism)上对Rebentisch的书的评论中指出的那样，“社会维度(进入)艺术体验正是通过她对公共话语的坚持，而公共话语必然完成了她所定义的审美体验。”因此，Rebentisch对主体性指控的辩护是建立在这样一个事实之上的，即接受者并没有“完全控制工作中的主观力量”(271)，而是陷入了一个无法被阻止的振荡过程，因为我们面临着我们自己的历史和社会特定假设。在这里，意义和材料“只以动态的、对立的相互关系存在于审美经验中”(114)。这就是Rebentisch的描述，尽管缺乏承认，让人想起沃尔夫冈伊瑟尔的接受美学的各个方面，与文学有关。两人都认为审美距离不是一种对作品的社会和历史背景的逃避，而是一种打开另一种视角的潜力，这种视角可能是习惯性的:面对占主导地位的思维模式。在这里，接受者的角色是表演性的。事实上，对伊瑟尔来说，再现既是一种表演行为(在其舞台上呈现出未被给予的东西)，也是一种表象(否认其作为现实副本的地位):“美学的表象只能通过接受者的观念性、表演性活动呈现其形式，因此再现只能在接受者的想象中实现;正是接受者的表演赋予了这种外表以真实感”(Iser 1989, 245)。虽然Rebentisch没有提到伊瑟尔对空白的使用，但她确实提到了海德格尔对“间隙”的描述，即“空虚”，它不是什么都没有，而是“建立一个地方或情况的暗示”(Heidegger 1997, 123-124)。Rebentisch强调这种场景或情境的对抗倾向“在这些过程中一次又一次地分崩离析，只有通过重新阅读才能以潜在的新的和不同的方式收集和安排”(2012,245-246)。但与Rebentisch相反，我想说这不仅仅是一个解释的过程，而是对构成作品的创造性过程的批判性检索(Wollheim 1980)。人们可能会想到科妮莉亚·帕克(Cornelia Parker) 1991年的装置作品《冰冷的暗物质:爆炸的景象》(Cold Dark Matter: An Exploded View)，这是一件悬空的作品，将英国军队在帕克的要求下炸毁的花园棚屋中的烧焦碎片重新组合在一起。在这里，爆炸、散落材料的回收、装置的精心配置都是作品意义的关键。但这不仅仅是一个艺术家决策重建的案例。批判性检索的概念提供了扩展想象力在作品呈现和接受之间调解作用的机会。对于伊瑟尔来说，消极性“通过作者在文本中使用空白或断线，启动了那些必要的想象过程，以引出那些条件的虚拟性”(1989,142)。因此，思想和投射的行为虽然是不确定的，却是许可的。然而，伊瑟尔指出，“文学的标志性符号构成了一个能指组织，它不是用来指定一个所指对象，而是指定生产所指的指令”(1978,65)。这需要读者/旁观者的参与。在帕克的装置作品中，它要求我们联想到不存在的因果事件的暴力，这种暴力被静态的展示带入紧张状态，这种展示只会被观察者的运动所激活。因此，装置艺术的指标性标志在其最深刻的意义上使观者的取向成为问题，不仅反映了作品的位置功能——通过让我们的空间取向发挥作用——而且还反映了我们的意识形态取向:引诱我们进入由空间的动态势组织的相遇，同时排斥我们(提醒我们我们对作品的虚拟领域的外部性)。如果审美自主性被重塑为一种动态的操作，与我们遇到的艺术作品的伦理和政治情况有关，那么框架扮演什么角色?考虑到装置艺术的沉浸感——置身于作品内部而非作品外部——以及装置艺术是否要避免堕落为罗莎琳德·克劳斯(Rosalind Krauss)错误地(我相信)声称的那种奇观，这是它的固有条件，这个问题是相关的。然而，场地的特殊性，虽然是一些装置的一个特点，但并不是必要条件，正如帕克的《冷暗物质》——一个多次迭代的作品——可以证明的那样。事实上，艺术的双重本土

{"title":"Installation Art and the Question of Aesthetic Autonomy: Juliane Rebentisch and the Beholder's Share","authors":"KEN WILDER","doi":"10.1111/jaac.12735","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jaac.12735","url":null,"abstract":"Intermedial art, as it emerged in the 1960s and 1970s, constituted a threat not only to the medium specificity of modernism, but also to the artwork as self-contained autonomous object. That this threat was real is evidenced by the ubiquitous presence of installation art. While only named as such toward the end of this period, installation art––a label still rejected by some of its founding artists––is exemplary of such hybrid practices. Its supporters and critics drew a contrast between, on the one hand, modernism's aesthetic engagement with a medium-specific (and self-sufficient) “object,” and, on the other hand, new so-called nonaesthetic “practices” engaging the “literal” spectator within her own space, such that the space of the gallery or situation is drawn into the encounter. So, while in 1967, Michael Fried writes disparagingly of the notion that “someone has merely to enter the room in which a literalist work has been placed to become that beholder, that audience of one” (1998, 193), Claire Bishop echoes such a claim when she suggests that “an insistence on the literal presence of the viewer is arguably the key characteristic of installation art” (2005, 6). Despite diametrically opposed critical evaluations of such situated art, a curious consensus emerges around a beholder whose “share” is characterized as a “being present.”It is indicative because it allows us to see an interrelation “between the anti-objectivist impulse of theories of aesthetic experience and the impulses toward the dissolution of the concept of the work in artistic practice”; thus, the opposition toward objectivism in a philosopher like Rüdiger Bubner is at the same time a “reaction to the destruction of the traditional unity of the work in contemporary art,” exemplified, of course, by installation art (Rebentisch 2012, 10).The object is aesthetic not by virtue of qualities that precede the experience of such an object (that is, guaranteed by production), but only when the encounter with the artwork initiates a specifically aesthetic experience. This is not “a return to subjectivism that would sacrifice the art critical discourse and with it any consideration of questions of productions aesthetics” (130–131), but rather a recognition that art critical discourse necessarily follows aesthetic experience and is, thus, constitutive of such aesthetic objects through processes of reflective transformation.Through such discursivity, Rebentisch seeks to avoid the pitfalls of an objectivism conceived as self-referential, and a subjectivism that posits the subject's aesthetic experience as its own object. She defines the aesthetic experience of installation art as a relation that does, indeed, involve aesthetic distance, in that it “brackets” the object not just as a self-referential “thing,” but through an event-like experience: a bracketing that highlights the performative role of the ","PeriodicalId":51571,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM","volume":"78 3","pages":"351-356"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2020-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/jaac.12735","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132533554","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 1

Is Moruzzi's Musical Stage Theory Advantaged? 莫鲁奇的音乐舞台理论有优势吗?

IF 0.8 2区艺术学 0 ART

JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM

Pub Date : 2020-08-13 DOI: 10.1111/jaac.12743

PHILIP LETTS

In a recent article, Caterina Moruzzi (2018) develops and defends her musical stage theory. This discussion response supposes that Moruzzi's development and defense of her stage theory are satisfactory, but it disputes her case for thinking that it has advantages over key rivals—the traditional type/token theory and musical perdurantism.In Section i, I contrast the three competitors by their differing explanations of musical work multiplicity. In Section ii.a, I dispute Moruzzi's claim that her stage theory's putative ability to explain our direct epistemological access to musical works advantages it over the type/token theory or musical perdurantism. In Section ii.b, I reject Moruzzi's argument for thinking that her musical stage theory better handles score-departing performances than does the normative type/token theory. In Section ii.c, I reject Moruzzi's argument for claiming that her musical stage theory handles improvisations better than the type/token theory. In Section iii, I conclude and hint at an alternative motivation for musical stage theory.Dominant explanations are instantiablist. They say that multiple musical works are instantiable or generic entities—kinds, types, or properties—that can be instantiated by several occurrences (see Wolterstorff 1980; Dodd 2007; Letts 2018).One instantiablist view is the traditional type-token theory, henceforth the “type-token” theory. This theory identifies each multiple musical work with a type, where these are construed as abstracta—entities lacking spatial location—that are instantiated, or “tokened,” by concrete—spatially located—performance-events (Dodd 2007, 42).Concerns about construing musical works as abstracta have led some to seek alternatives to the type-token theory (Caplan and Matheson 2006, 59–60; Tillman 2011, 14). One alternative is performance perdurantism, henceforth “perdurantism.” On this view, each multiple musical work is a mereological fusion of its performances, themselves concrete events made up of momentary stages united by an I-relation appropriate to musical works (Caplan and Matheson 2006, 61–62, 65; 2008, 80; see also Lewis 1976). Perdurantism explains (M) by claiming that a single musical work, qua mereological fusion, has several performances as its proper parts (Caplan and Matheson 2006, 64–65; 2008, 84–85).Moruzzi's performance stage theory, henceforth “stage theory,” is a concretist view fundamentally similar to perdurantism, but it departs in key ways. First, Moruzzi's stages—her I-related concreta—are whole performances, rather than momentary performance-slices.1 Second, stage theory does <

在最近的一篇文章中，Caterina Moruzzi(2018)发展并捍卫了她的音乐舞台理论。这个讨论回应假设Moruzzi对她的舞台理论的发展和辩护是令人满意的，但它质疑了她认为它比主要对手——传统的类型/符号理论和音乐持久主义——有优势的观点。在第一节中，我对比了三个竞争者对音乐作品多样性的不同解释。在第ii节。a，我不同意Moruzzi的说法，即她的阶段理论假定有能力解释我们对音乐作品的直接认识论途径，这比类型/符号理论或音乐持久性理论更有优势。在第ii节。b，我反对Moruzzi的观点，认为她的音乐舞台理论比规范类型/符号理论更好地处理偏离分数的表演。在第ii.c节中，我反对Moruzzi声称她的音乐舞台理论比类型/符号理论更能处理即兴表演的论点。在第三节中，我总结并暗示了音乐舞台理论的另一种动机。主要的解释是可实例化的。他们说，多个音乐作品是可实例化的或通用实体——种类、类型或属性——可以通过多次出现实例化(见Wolterstorff 1980;多德2007;Letts也2018)。一种可实例化的观点是传统的类型令牌理论，即“类型令牌”理论。这一理论将每个音乐作品都定义为一种类型，这些类型被解释为缺乏空间位置的抽象实体，通过具体的空间位置表演事件实例化或“标记”(Dodd 2007, 42)。对将音乐作品视为抽象作品的担忧导致一些人寻求替代类型标记理论(Caplan and Matheson 2006,59 - 60;Tillman 2011,14)。另一种选择是性能持久主义，因此称为“持久主义”。根据这一观点，每一部多部音乐作品都是其表演的流变融合，它们本身是由适合于音乐作品的i关系统一的瞬间阶段组成的具体事件(Caplan and Matheson 2006,61 - 62,65;2008年,80年;参见Lewis 1976)。持久主义解释(M)，声称一个单一的音乐作品，作为一种流变的融合，有几个表演作为其适当的部分(Caplan和Matheson 2006, 64-65;2008年,84 - 85)。莫鲁奇的表演阶段理论，即“阶段理论”，是一种从根本上与持久主义相似的具体主义观点，但在关键方面有所不同。首先，Moruzzi的舞台——她与我相关的具体作品——是完整的表演，而不是瞬间的表演片段第二，舞台理论并没有将音乐作品等同于表演的融合。相反，在舞台理论中，“音乐作品是一个舞台/表演，通过一种特权关系(音乐作品的I-relation)与其他舞台/表演联系在一起”(2018,342)。也就是说，对于Moruzzi来说，音乐作品名称的每一个典型出现都有一些参考焦点表演作为其语义价值-我们通常谈论的作品是表演(345，也见Sider 2001, 191-192)这种独特的论点排除了阶段理论在整体部分术语解释(M)。相反，阶段理论通过吸引与i相关的表演的多样性来解释作品(作为表演)的多样性(Moruzzi 2018, 345)。Moruzzi提出了一个紧凑的案例，认为她的观点比对手更有优势(348-349)。这篇文章对她的观点进行了发展和反驳。正如这里所解释的，Moruzzi声称阶段理论比其他观点更有优势的论点似乎没有说服力。希望这篇文章能够帮助人们更加关注音乐舞台理论的其他动机。关于连续体的阶段理论的一个有影响力的论点是，它比持久论和持久论的竞争对手更好地解释了它们如何经历内在变化(Sider 2000和2001,92-98)。如果音乐作品经历了内在的变化(Rohrbaugh 2003, 188-189)，一个支持音乐阶段理论而不是持久性理论的平行论点，以及流行的持久性理论的类型标记理论概念，可能会为音乐阶段理论提供一个更有说服力的论点

{"title":"Is Moruzzi's Musical Stage Theory Advantaged?","authors":"PHILIP LETTS","doi":"10.1111/jaac.12743","DOIUrl":"10.1111/jaac.12743","url":null,"abstract":"In a recent article, Caterina Moruzzi (2018) develops and defends her musical stage theory. This discussion response supposes that Moruzzi's development and defense of her stage theory are satisfactory, but it disputes her case for thinking that it has advantages over key rivals—the traditional type/token theory and musical perdurantism.In Section i, I contrast the three competitors by their differing explanations of musical work multiplicity. In Section ii.a, I dispute Moruzzi's claim that her stage theory's putative ability to explain our direct epistemological access to musical works advantages it over the type/token theory or musical perdurantism. In Section ii.b, I reject Moruzzi's argument for thinking that her musical stage theory better handles score-departing performances than does the normative type/token theory. In Section ii.c, I reject Moruzzi's argument for claiming that her musical stage theory handles improvisations better than the type/token theory. In Section iii, I conclude and hint at an alternative motivation for musical stage theory.Dominant explanations are instantiablist. They say that multiple musical works are instantiable or generic entities—kinds, types, or properties—that can be instantiated by several occurrences (see Wolterstorff 1980; Dodd 2007; Letts 2018).One instantiablist view is the traditional type-token theory, henceforth the “type-token” theory. This theory identifies each multiple musical work with a type, where these are construed as abstracta—entities lacking spatial location—that are instantiated, or “tokened,” by concrete—spatially located—performance-events (Dodd 2007, 42).Concerns about construing musical works as abstracta have led some to seek alternatives to the type-token theory (Caplan and Matheson 2006, 59–60; Tillman 2011, 14). One alternative is performance perdurantism, henceforth “perdurantism.” On this view, each multiple musical work is a mereological fusion of its performances, themselves concrete events made up of momentary stages united by an I-relation appropriate to musical works (Caplan and Matheson 2006, 61–62, 65; 2008, 80; see also Lewis 1976). Perdurantism explains (M) by claiming that a single musical work, qua mereological fusion, has several performances as its proper parts (Caplan and Matheson 2006, 64–65; 2008, 84–85).Moruzzi's performance stage theory, henceforth “stage theory,” is a concretist view fundamentally similar to perdurantism, but it departs in key ways. First, Moruzzi's stages—her I-related concreta—are whole performances, rather than momentary performance-slices.1 Second, stage theory does <","PeriodicalId":51571,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM","volume":"78 3","pages":"357-362"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8,"publicationDate":"2020-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1111/jaac.12743","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129922187","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"艺术学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

The 2021 John Fisher Memorial Prize 2021年约翰·费雪纪念奖

IF 0.8 2区艺术学 0 ART

JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM

Pub Date : 2020-08-13 DOI: 10.1111/jaac.12737

引用次数: 0

首页上一页

下一页尾页

类型

全部化学•材料生命科学医学物理工程技术环境•农林材料科学地球科学法学管理学化学环境科学与生态学计算机科学教育学经济学农林科学人文科学生物学数学物理与天体物理心理学综合性期刊其他工业工程理学历史学农学文学信息工程

数据库

全部 ACS Publications Elsevier ieeexplore Springer The Royal Society of Chemistry Wiley

期刊

JOURNAL OF AESTHETICS AND ART CRITICISM

全部 Acc. Chem. Res. ACS Applied Bio Materials ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces ACS Appl. Nano Mater. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. ACS BIOMATER-SCI ENG ACS Catal. ACS Cent. Sci. ACS Chem. Biol. ACS Chemical Health & Safety ACS Chem. Neurosci. ACS Comb. Sci. ACS Earth Space Chem. ACS Energy Lett. ACS Infect. Dis. ACS Macro Lett. ACS Mater. Lett. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. ACS Nano ACS Omega ACS Photonics ACS Sens. ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. ACS Synth. Biol. Anal. Chem. BIOCHEMISTRY-US Bioconjugate Chem. BIOMACROMOLECULES Chem. Res. Toxicol. Chem. Rev. Chem. Mater. CRYST GROWTH DES ENERG FUEL Environ. Sci. Technol. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. IND ENG CHEM RES Inorg. Chem. J. Agric. Food. Chem. J. Chem. Eng. Data J. Chem. Educ. J. Chem. Inf. Model. J. Chem. Theory Comput. J. Med. Chem. J. Nat. Prod. J PROTEOME RES J. Am. Chem. Soc. LANGMUIR MACROMOLECULES Mol. Pharmaceutics Nano Lett. Org. Lett. ORG PROCESS RES DEV ORGANOMETALLICS J. Org. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. J. Phys. Chem. A J. Phys. Chem. B J. Phys. Chem. C J. Phys. Chem. Lett. Analyst Anal. Methods Biomater. Sci. Catal. Sci. Technol. Chem. Commun. Chem. Soc. Rev. CHEM EDUC RES PRACT CRYSTENGCOMM Dalton Trans. Energy Environ. Sci. ENVIRON SCI-NANO ENVIRON SCI-PROC IMP ENVIRON SCI-WAT RES Faraday Discuss. Food Funct. Green Chem. Inorg. Chem. Front. Integr. Biol. J. Anal. At. Spectrom. J. Mater. Chem. A J. Mater. Chem. B J. Mater. Chem. C Lab Chip Mater. Chem. Front. Mater. Horiz. MEDCHEMCOMM Metallomics Mol. Biosyst. Mol. Syst. Des. Eng. Nanoscale Nanoscale Horiz. Nat. Prod. Rep. New J. Chem. Org. Biomol. Chem. Org. Chem. Front. PHOTOCH PHOTOBIO SCI PCCP Polym. Chem.

﹀