Two Ambiguities in Object-Oriented Aesthetic Interpretation
The aesthetic theory of Graham Harman’s Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO) revolves around the concept of allure, a nonliteral experience of an object’s displacement from its qualities that draws attention to a deeper reality. But applying allure to aesthetic interpretation is hampered in two ways. Firs...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
De Gruyter
2020-10-01
|
Series: | Open Philosophy |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1515/opphil-2020-0139 |
id |
doaj-9e11f04a4fb34def99d14acc4e8f0358 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-9e11f04a4fb34def99d14acc4e8f03582021-09-22T06:13:18ZengDe GruyterOpen Philosophy2543-88752020-10-013159961010.1515/opphil-2020-0139opphil-2020-0139Two Ambiguities in Object-Oriented Aesthetic InterpretationTaxier Eric0City University of New York, New York, United States of AmericaThe aesthetic theory of Graham Harman’s Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO) revolves around the concept of allure, a nonliteral experience of an object’s displacement from its qualities that draws attention to a deeper reality. But applying allure to aesthetic interpretation is hampered in two ways. First, OOO necessarily moves between the constrained viewpoint of experience and a more global perspective. Yet mixing these “inside” and “outside” views can risk ambiguity. Second, the phenomenological difference between the parts and qualities of an object must be clarified before Harman’s model of wholes and parts can be incorporated into OOO aesthetics. Addressing these two ambiguities will make it possible to further develop OOO’s resources for aesthetic commentary. For instance, one conclusion is that allure itself has two varieties: a tension between the object and its qualities (“allusion”) and a tension between the whole and its parts (“collusion”). These options parallel Harman’s twofold critique of reductionism. Another conclusion is that the literal needs an explanation within the framework of OOO insofar as it is a genuine feature of experience.https://doi.org/10.1515/opphil-2020-0139object-oriented ontologyaestheticsmereologymetaphysicsgraham harman |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Taxier Eric |
spellingShingle |
Taxier Eric Two Ambiguities in Object-Oriented Aesthetic Interpretation Open Philosophy object-oriented ontology aesthetics mereology metaphysics graham harman |
author_facet |
Taxier Eric |
author_sort |
Taxier Eric |
title |
Two Ambiguities in Object-Oriented Aesthetic Interpretation |
title_short |
Two Ambiguities in Object-Oriented Aesthetic Interpretation |
title_full |
Two Ambiguities in Object-Oriented Aesthetic Interpretation |
title_fullStr |
Two Ambiguities in Object-Oriented Aesthetic Interpretation |
title_full_unstemmed |
Two Ambiguities in Object-Oriented Aesthetic Interpretation |
title_sort |
two ambiguities in object-oriented aesthetic interpretation |
publisher |
De Gruyter |
series |
Open Philosophy |
issn |
2543-8875 |
publishDate |
2020-10-01 |
description |
The aesthetic theory of Graham Harman’s Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO) revolves around the concept of allure, a nonliteral experience of an object’s displacement from its qualities that draws attention to a deeper reality. But applying allure to aesthetic interpretation is hampered in two ways. First, OOO necessarily moves between the constrained viewpoint of experience and a more global perspective. Yet mixing these “inside” and “outside” views can risk ambiguity. Second, the phenomenological difference between the parts and qualities of an object must be clarified before Harman’s model of wholes and parts can be incorporated into OOO aesthetics. Addressing these two ambiguities will make it possible to further develop OOO’s resources for aesthetic commentary. For instance, one conclusion is that allure itself has two varieties: a tension between the object and its qualities (“allusion”) and a tension between the whole and its parts (“collusion”). These options parallel Harman’s twofold critique of reductionism. Another conclusion is that the literal needs an explanation within the framework of OOO insofar as it is a genuine feature of experience. |
topic |
object-oriented ontology aesthetics mereology metaphysics graham harman |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1515/opphil-2020-0139 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT taxiereric twoambiguitiesinobjectorientedaestheticinterpretation |
_version_ |
1717371770234732544 |