Animals in Contemporary Art

Ted Nannicelli
{"title":"Animals in Contemporary Art","authors":"Ted Nannicelli","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780197507247.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With reference to a number of contemporary cases, such as that surrounding the Guggenheim’s Art and China after 1989: Theater of the World exhibition, this chapter argues that some important controversies about the ethics of art can be explained in terms of a disconnect between people who tacitly adopt the perspectivist (or another interpretation-oriented) approach to ethical criticism and people who tacitly adopt a production-oriented approach to ethical criticism. The chapter argues that perspectivism tends to be favored not only in philosophical aesthetics, but also in art criticism and in many art world institutions. In contrast, non-specialists tend to tacitly adopt the production-oriented approach. In the case of the use of animals in contemporary art, current controversies are further explained by the fact that, given some fairly uncontroversial premises about the moral respect that we owe to non-human animals, people who evaluate such work from a production-oriented approach are likely to find much that is prima facie ethically blameworthy. Moreover, they are rationally warranted in doing so.","PeriodicalId":114299,"journal":{"name":"Artistic Creation and Ethical Criticism","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Artistic Creation and Ethical Criticism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197507247.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

With reference to a number of contemporary cases, such as that surrounding the Guggenheim’s Art and China after 1989: Theater of the World exhibition, this chapter argues that some important controversies about the ethics of art can be explained in terms of a disconnect between people who tacitly adopt the perspectivist (or another interpretation-oriented) approach to ethical criticism and people who tacitly adopt a production-oriented approach to ethical criticism. The chapter argues that perspectivism tends to be favored not only in philosophical aesthetics, but also in art criticism and in many art world institutions. In contrast, non-specialists tend to tacitly adopt the production-oriented approach. In the case of the use of animals in contemporary art, current controversies are further explained by the fact that, given some fairly uncontroversial premises about the moral respect that we owe to non-human animals, people who evaluate such work from a production-oriented approach are likely to find much that is prima facie ethically blameworthy. Moreover, they are rationally warranted in doing so.
当代艺术中的动物
参考当代的一些案例,例如围绕1989年之后的古根海姆艺术与中国:世界剧院展览,本章认为,一些关于艺术伦理的重要争议可以解释为,人们默认采用透视主义(或另一种以解释为导向的)方法来进行伦理批评,而人们默认采用以生产为导向的方法来进行伦理批评。本章认为,透视主义不仅在哲学美学中受到青睐,而且在艺术批评和许多艺术世界机构中也受到青睐。相反,非专业人员倾向于默认以生产为导向的方法。在当代艺术中使用动物的情况下,当前的争议可以通过以下事实进一步解释:考虑到我们对非人类动物的道德尊重的一些相当没有争议的前提,从以生产为导向的方法来评估此类作品的人可能会发现许多表面上应该受到道德上的谴责。此外,他们这样做是合理的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信