{"title":"书评","authors":"Collins","doi":"10.5325/langhughrevi.26.1.0107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The demand that philosophy be relevant is not new. The book under review, without escaping this outcome, displays constant tension between supporting, on the one hand, a practical agenda with a rich display of deeply philosophic works, and on the other hand demonstrating useful application of those same texts, without compromising their complexity. Despite suggestive links to Nancy, Derrida, and Rancière, not enough attention is paid to the subtlety of deconstruction, and the result is a tenuous mixture of theory oriented toward the fascinating fields of art, psychotherapy, and politics. Collins begins by building her case from Rancière’s notion of ‘partage du sensible’, or, distribution of the sensible, and argues for, not necessarily the curative, but palliative effects of art therapy, stating in effect that ‘artwork makes political sense’ (1). Her book is divided into two parts. In the first, Collins seeks to demonstrate the affectivity of art objects and their utility toward healing individuals in a manner that, in bypassing the clinic, also challenges it. Each mode of the triadic structure of aesthetic experience – that is, artwork as aesthetic object, the spectator and their aesthetic encounter, and the relation conjoining artist and their creative art process – sustains the possibility for stimulating a transformative therapeutic. The hope is to cultivate a sense of, and provide a theoretical basis for an art practice that could exist independent of clinical intervention, without substituting it absolutely. Once having established support for an agency of transformative art practice, Collins in the second part works to expand this concept into a critical method of thinking that could institute socio-political change.","PeriodicalId":29877,"journal":{"name":"Langston Hughes Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Book Review\",\"authors\":\"Collins\",\"doi\":\"10.5325/langhughrevi.26.1.0107\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The demand that philosophy be relevant is not new. The book under review, without escaping this outcome, displays constant tension between supporting, on the one hand, a practical agenda with a rich display of deeply philosophic works, and on the other hand demonstrating useful application of those same texts, without compromising their complexity. Despite suggestive links to Nancy, Derrida, and Rancière, not enough attention is paid to the subtlety of deconstruction, and the result is a tenuous mixture of theory oriented toward the fascinating fields of art, psychotherapy, and politics. Collins begins by building her case from Rancière’s notion of ‘partage du sensible’, or, distribution of the sensible, and argues for, not necessarily the curative, but palliative effects of art therapy, stating in effect that ‘artwork makes political sense’ (1). Her book is divided into two parts. In the first, Collins seeks to demonstrate the affectivity of art objects and their utility toward healing individuals in a manner that, in bypassing the clinic, also challenges it. Each mode of the triadic structure of aesthetic experience – that is, artwork as aesthetic object, the spectator and their aesthetic encounter, and the relation conjoining artist and their creative art process – sustains the possibility for stimulating a transformative therapeutic. The hope is to cultivate a sense of, and provide a theoretical basis for an art practice that could exist independent of clinical intervention, without substituting it absolutely. Once having established support for an agency of transformative art practice, Collins in the second part works to expand this concept into a critical method of thinking that could institute socio-political change.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29877,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Langston Hughes Review\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Langston Hughes Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5325/langhughrevi.26.1.0107\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE, AMERICAN\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Langston Hughes Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/langhughrevi.26.1.0107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LITERATURE, AMERICAN","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
要求哲学具有相关性并不是什么新鲜事。正在审查的这本书,在不回避这一结果的情况下,在一方面支持一个富有哲理的作品的实践议程,另一方面在不影响其复杂性的情况下展示这些文本的有用应用之间,显示出持续的紧张关系。尽管与Nancy、Derrida和Rancière有着暗示性的联系,但人们对解构的微妙之处没有给予足够的关注,其结果是对艺术、心理治疗和政治等迷人领域的理论进行了微妙的混合。柯林斯首先从Rancière的“理智的部分”(partage du sensible)或“理智的分配”的概念出发,并主张艺术疗法不一定具有治疗效果,而是具有缓和效果,实际上指出“艺术具有政治意义”(1)。她的书分为两部分。在第一篇文章中,柯林斯试图以一种绕过诊所的方式来展示艺术对象的情感及其对治愈个体的效用。审美体验的三元结构的每一种模式——即艺术作为审美对象、观众和他们的审美遭遇,以及艺术家和他们的创作艺术过程之间的联系——维持了激发变革性治疗的可能性。希望培养一种独立于临床干预而存在的艺术实践的意识,并为其提供理论基础,而不是绝对取代它。柯林斯在第二部分中,一旦建立了对变革性艺术实践机构的支持,就致力于将这一概念扩展为一种批判性的思维方法,从而引发社会政治变革。
The demand that philosophy be relevant is not new. The book under review, without escaping this outcome, displays constant tension between supporting, on the one hand, a practical agenda with a rich display of deeply philosophic works, and on the other hand demonstrating useful application of those same texts, without compromising their complexity. Despite suggestive links to Nancy, Derrida, and Rancière, not enough attention is paid to the subtlety of deconstruction, and the result is a tenuous mixture of theory oriented toward the fascinating fields of art, psychotherapy, and politics. Collins begins by building her case from Rancière’s notion of ‘partage du sensible’, or, distribution of the sensible, and argues for, not necessarily the curative, but palliative effects of art therapy, stating in effect that ‘artwork makes political sense’ (1). Her book is divided into two parts. In the first, Collins seeks to demonstrate the affectivity of art objects and their utility toward healing individuals in a manner that, in bypassing the clinic, also challenges it. Each mode of the triadic structure of aesthetic experience – that is, artwork as aesthetic object, the spectator and their aesthetic encounter, and the relation conjoining artist and their creative art process – sustains the possibility for stimulating a transformative therapeutic. The hope is to cultivate a sense of, and provide a theoretical basis for an art practice that could exist independent of clinical intervention, without substituting it absolutely. Once having established support for an agency of transformative art practice, Collins in the second part works to expand this concept into a critical method of thinking that could institute socio-political change.