|
MAIN PAGE
> Back to contents
Man and Culture
Reference:
Makeeva S. —
Installation discourse: key positions and concepts
// Man and Culture.
– 2020. – ¹ 2.
– P. 49 - 64.
DOI: 10.25136/2409-8744.2020.2.32471 URL: https://en.nbpublish.com/library_read_article.php?id=32471
Installation discourse: key positions and concepts
Makeeva Svetlana
Postgraduate students, the department of General History of Arts, M. V. Lomonosov Moscow State University
119192, Russia, g. Moscow, ul. Lomonosovskii Prospekt, d. 27, korp. 4
|
s.o.makeeva@yandex.ru
|
|
 |
Äðóãèå ïóáëèêàöèè ýòîãî àâòîðà
|
|
DOI: 10.25136/2409-8744.2020.2.32471
Review date:
25-03-2020
Publish date:
30-04-2020
Abstract. The subject of this research is the fundamental positions and concepts of installation discourse, i.e. key texts that are dedicated to installation and formed representation on this artistic practice. Installation discourse has emerged in the West in the early 1960’s, and presently there can be determined the “anchor points, “objective concepts”, main positions and vectors of installation analysis. Elements of the discourse include academic monographs, such as art criticism, texts of artists, and exhibition catalogues. The article employs the methods of discourse analysis of E. Laclau, C. Mouffe, N. Fairclough, as well as general discourse theory of M. Foucault described in the “Archeology of Knowledge”. The conducted discourse analysis allows making the following conclusions. The three main vectors of installation discourse can be associated with three “turns” of philosophy and humanistic thought of the XX century – phenomenological, linguistic and performative. Discourse analysis allows tracing the meanings imposed on the “anchor points” in various vectors of the discourse. Discourse analysis gives a perspective on the “objective concepts” of discourse that underlie the understanding of installation at the present stage – “theatricality”, “indermediality”, “unlocked”, anti-object character of installation, site-specificity; institutional criticism, multisensority and ephemerality.
Keywords:
Brian ODoherty, Michael Fried, performative turn, linguistic turn, phenomenological turn, discourse, installation, Germano Celant, Claire Bishop, Juliane Rebentisch
This article written in Russian. You can find full text of article in Russian
here
.
References
|
1.
|
Derrida Zh. Pravda o zhivopisi / Estetika i teoriya iskusstva XX veka: Khrestomatiya // Sost. N. A. Khrenov, A. S. Migunov. — M.: Progress-Traditsiya, 2008. — S. 306–319.
|
|
2.
|
Iorgensen M. V., Fillips L. Dzh. Diskurs-analiz. Teoriya i metod / Per. s angl. — 2-e izd., ispr. — Khar'kov: Izd-vo «Gumanitarnyi Tsentr», 2008. — 352 s.
|
|
3.
|
Merlo-Ponti M. Oko i dukh / Per. s fr., predisl. i komment. A. V. Gustyrya. — M.: Iskusstvo, 1992. — 63 s.
|
|
4.
|
O’Dogerti B. Vnutri belogo kuba. Ideologiya galereinogo prostranstva. — M.: Ad Marginem Press, 2015. — 144 s.
|
|
5.
|
Fuko M. Arkheologiya znaniya / Per. s fr. M. B. Rakovoi, A. Yu. Serebryannikovoi; vstup. st. A. S. Kolesnikova. — SPb.: ITs «Gumanitarnaya Akademiya»; Universitetskaya kniga, 2004. — 416 s.
|
|
6.
|
Auslander P. From Acting to Performance: Essays in Modernism and Postmodernism. — London and New York: Routledge, 2002. — 173 p.
|
|
7.
|
Bishop C. Installation Art: A Critical History. — London: Routledge, 2005. — 144 p.
|
|
8.
|
Buren D., Repensek T. The Function of the Studio // October. — 1979. — Vol. 10. — Pp. 51–58.
|
|
9.
|
Celant G. Ambiente/arte: dal futurismo alla body art. — La biennale di Venezia, 1977. — 236 p.
|
|
10.
|
Fairclough N. Media Discourse. — London; New York: E. Arnold, 1995. — 224 p.
|
|
11.
|
Fischer-Lichte E. From Text to Performance: The Rise of Theatre Studies as an Academic Discipline in Germany. — Theatre Research International. — 1999. — Vol. 24. — No. 2. — Pp. 168–178.
|
|
12.
|
Fried M. An Introduction to My Art Criticism [1996] // Art and Objecthood. Essays and Reviews / M. Fried. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press, 1998. P. 1–74.
|
|
13.
|
Fried M. Art and Objecthood [1967] // Art and Objecthood. Essays and Reviews / M. Fried. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press, 1998. P. 148–172.
|
|
14.
|
Fried M. How Modernism Works: A Response to T. J. Clark // Critical Inquiry. — 1982. — Vol. 9. — No. 1. — Pp. 217–234.
|
|
15.
|
Higgins D., Higgins H. Intermedia [1965] // Leonardo. — 2001. — Vol. 34. — No. 1. — Pp. 49–54.
|
|
16.
|
Judd D. Specific Obiects // Donald Judd: Early Work, 1955–1968 / T. Kellein. — New York: D.A.P., 2002. — URL: http://atc.berkeley.edu/201/readings/judd-so.pdf (Data obrashcheniya: 25.09.2018)
|
|
17.
|
Kaprow A. Assemblages, Environments and Happenings [1965] // Art in Theory 1900–2000: An Anthology of Changing Ideas / eds.: C. Harrison, P. Wood. — Oxford: Blackwell Publ., 1999. — Pp. 703–709.
|
|
18.
|
Laclau E. Power and Representation // Politics, theory, and contemporary culture / ed.: Mark Poster. — New York : Columbia University Press, 1993. — Pp. 277–296.
|
|
19.
|
Mitchell W. J. T. There Are No Visual Media / Journal of Visual Culture. — 2005. — Vol. 4. — Issue 2. — Pp. 257–266.
|
|
20.
|
Morris R. Notes on Sculpture, Part 2 // Continuous Project Altered Daily: The Writings of Robert Morris. — Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; New York, N.Y.: Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, 1993. — Pp. 11–21.
|
|
21.
|
Potts A. The Sculptural Imagination: Figurative, Modernist, Minimalist. — Yale University Press, 2000. — 417 p.
|
|
22.
|
Rebentisch J. Aesthetics of Installation Art. — Berlin: Sternberg Press, 2012. — 296 p.
|
|
23.
|
Reiss J. H. From Margin to Center: the Spaces of Installation Art. — Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1999. — 181 p.
|
|
24.
|
Restany P. The New Realists [1960] // Art in Theory 1900–2000: An Anthology of Changing Ideas / eds.: C. Harrison, P. Wood. — Oxford: Blackwell Publ., 1999. — P. 711–712
|
Link to this article
You can simply select and copy link from below text field.
|
|
