Towards the philosophical status of the paramuseal Discussions in flight between the Museum as an aesthetic apparatus and Institutional Criticism
In this research, based on Jean-Louis Déotte and the idea of the museum as aesthetics’ apparatus and origin, we seek to approach the philosophical status of the paramuseal. For this, we place ourselves in the conceptual basis of Institutional Critique, and in particular in the theoretical and curato...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | tesis doctoral |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2020 |
| País: | Chile |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.anid.cl:10533/252996 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/10533/252996 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Humanidades Otras Humanidades |
| Sumario: | In this research, based on Jean-Louis Déotte and the idea of the museum as aesthetics’ apparatus and origin, we seek to approach the philosophical status of the paramuseal. For this, we place ourselves in the conceptual basis of Institutional Critique, and in particular in the theoretical and curatorial proposal of Martí Peran. These frameworks place us in a "critique of everyday life" and a philosophy of culture. In Chapter I, we establish with the Institutional Critique the tensioning from the subversive place of art, questioning both the fulfilment of the promise, as the philosophical statute of the modern museum. The broad foundation is the crisis of representation, of the surface and of the subject. In Chapter II we present the conceptual bases and the philosophical questionings around the museum as déottian aesthetics apparatus, developing the ontological characters, tecno-poietics and aesthetics. We close with “the promise” of the museum, the one that the Institutional Critique detects unfulfilled, and that the paramuseal reveals. In Chapter III we carry out theoretical discussions, establishing relations and “tests” of the aesthetic apparatus, in general, and of the projective museum in particular, in order to establish a propositive approach facing the philosophical characteristics of the paramuseal. Finally, we understand it as a technical device of the aesthetics museal apparatus that operates as critical guard and supposes a sensitive exercise in the individual and collective experience. On one instance, it raises again the philosophical ideas of surface, subject and representation and thanks to its dynamics and heterotopological characteristics, promotes new cartographies, places an in-transit subject, and facilitates the problematic representation of local historicities. On another instance, it happens in a quotidian present that recovers abandoned futures and works as an input in the subversion of the artistic occurrence, that in its aesthetical and political quality, is differentiating and profanatory. |
|---|