|
|
 |
Search published articles |
 |
|
Showing 3 results for Autonomy
Saber Dashtara, Volume 3, Issue 12 (11-2014)
Abstract
Art’s autonomy and its independence
from any sort of external aim, is one of the
most important concepts rising from the
modern art and in a sense, what constitutes
the very border between modern and
traditional arts. While the Philosophy of
art has shown many different positive
or negative reactions to the autonomy
of art, the present article tries to study
and compare two exemplary reactions
which belong to Theodor Adorno and
Walter Benjamin. Scholars usually tend
to categorize these two thinkers under the
rather vague term “the Frankfurt School”
and then put the stress on the convergences
between their ideas but in the case of art,
as we shall see, Benjamin and Adorno
seem somehow divergent. This divergence
can on the one hand, help us comprehend
the different aspects of modern art and on
the other, it can pave the way for a deeper
understanding regarding each of these two
figures.
Ali Salehi Farsani, Saeed Hajinaseri, Volume 3, Issue 13 (1-2015)
Abstract
Critical approach to situation of modern
culture is on the base of obstacles that
are proposed in this approach. In this
approach, the most important obstacle to
‘autonomy’ is the logic of ‘instrumentality’
and its disenchanting sequence. On this
foundation, the question is whether we can
find a sphere that will be beyond of logic of
‘instrumentality’. In addition, are the aesthetic
sphere and art beyond of this logic and also is
this sphere able to pave the way for getting rid
of this logic?
Theoretical framework in this article, for
assessing critical approach to modern culture,
is the trajectory of critical thought that
Foucault has drawn. The trajectory that starts
by Nietzsche and lead to Frankfurt school.
Weber, Lyotard and Foucault would be
compared in this framework and on the base
of method of Lovejoy`s history of ideas, to see
if their critical approach to ‘instrumentality’
lead to preferring of the aesthetic sphere and
art (as possibility for redemption through
aesthetic ‘autonomy’).
Findings of this article shows that Foucault
(on contrary to Weber and Lyotard) thinks that
aesthetics isn`t beyond of ‘instrumentality’ and
Weber (on contrary to Lyotard and Foucault)
thinks that the avant-gard art can’t challenge
‘instrumentality’. Foucault, however, (on
contrary to Lyotard) thinks that redemption
locates in boundary of the rational.
Mehdi Qadernezhad, Marzieh Piravivanak, Sadreddin Tahery, Volume 6, Issue 24 (11-2017)
Abstract
The problem of Autonomy of art in Adorno’s aesthetic is one of the most valuable and impressive subjects in contemporary aesthetic. On the one hand, Adorno uses “monad” metaphor (in Leibnizian meaning) for describing autonomous art work, and, on the other hand, he introduces art work as an absolute commodity. This study wants to answer this question: according to Adorno’s idea, how autonomous art works are to be realized under the condions where commodified relation are dominated? Understanding this subject is dependent on conceiving the theoretical basis of Adorno’s philosophy and especially his negative dialectic theory. In the first part of this study I would try to prove the necessity of Adorno’s dialecticalhistorical defense of autonomy of art with a short explanation of his non- identical thinking approach and negative dialectic theory, as a basis of his philosophy. In the second part, while explaining the aspect of political economy in the theory of negative dialectic and by elucidating the dominant commodified logic in art, I would try to clarify that the art work reveals the absolute commodity to be an aspect of autonomy.
|
|