Periodic Reporting for period 1 - IEIA (Imagination in the Experience of Installation Art)
Période du rapport: 2023-09-01 au 2025-08-31
Several works by Ernesto Neto present huge, warm-colored, pleasantly smelling Lycra tunnels. They are cases of installation art: the public is supposed to enter the tunnels and interact with the physical environment, experiencing the works from within. Works of installation art resemble buildings because they envelop the public, but they differ in that, like paintings and sculptures, they do not have a sheltering function. This raises a philosophical question: what is distinctive of our engagement with installation art? This project looks at certain kinds of states of mind aroused by works of installation art to highlight distinctive aspects of our engagement with works in this art form. Its goal is to develop the first full-fledged philosophical account of our engagement with installation art, arguing that, typically, imaginative states of mind, as well as affective and introspective states of mind play a crucial role in it. The project’s goal is relevant to aestheticians and art theorists, because installation art dominates contemporary art, and to art practitioners and public, because it can help improve the design, exhibition, and communication of installation art.
Installation art has boomed since the 1950s: art-theoretical accounts of its origins, development and peculiarities abound (e.g. Reiss 1999; Bishop 2005). Among art theorists there is a consensus that installation art eludes definition, being too multifaceted. As for the public’s interaction with installation art, the prevalent art-theoretical view is grounded in Michael Fried’s seminal "Art and Objecthood" (1968) and it claims that works of installation art are sets of ‘literal’ objects that lack representational character and are supposed not to engage the imagination significantly, but rather to make us focus on our perceptual experience of them. Some philosophers have theorized about installation art’s cultural significance (e.g. Bourriaud 2002; Fischer-Lichte 2008) and, more recently, a few have focussed on its ontology and metaphysics (e.g. Irvin 2013; 2022). Philosophical research on the public’s engagement with installation art, however, is still very limited and lacking in depth. Juliane Rebentisch (2003) maintains that installation art generates an aesthetic appreciative experience, but she doesn’t provide a phenomenology of such experience, focusing instead mostly on defending the radical metaphysical view that works of installation art have no intrinsic objective being. Kenneth Wilder(2020) analyses how the spatial structure of certain works of installation art sometimes prompts the public to imagine certain fictional situations where she plays a role, but his proposal, although insightful, is limited to a few specific cases.
Overall objectives:
(1) Installation art and prop-oriented make-believe: (1a) writing and submitting a paper defending the view that some works of installation art typically invite us to engage in games of prop oriented make-believe; (1b) writing and submitting a paper defending the view that some works of installation art typically invite us to have affective reactions in response to them.
(2) A functional view of installation art: (2a) writing and submitting a paper defending the view that works of installation art are typically designed to arouse introspective experiences; (2b) writing and submitting a paper clarifying the notion of atmosphere, with the prospect of employing the notion to discuss installation art, among other things; (2c) writing and submitting a paper defending the view that some works of installation art are also designed to arouse atmospheric experiences.
(3) Against the literalist view of installation art: (3a) writing and submitting a paper defending the view that installation art is one of the spatial arts and highlighting similarities and differences between installation art and other spatial arts; (3b) writing and submitting a paper defending the view that installation art is not literal in that it has subject matter, as part of a broader account of artistic subject matter.
(4) Installation art, minimalims, and abstract painting: writing and submitting a paper offering a philosophical foundation for the art-theoretical view that Minimalism (e.g. Donald Judd’s and Carl Andre’s works) was the first artistic movement that, in the late 1950s, focused on real, beholder-including space as an alternative to the bi-dimensional constraints of abstract painting (the main avant-garde art practice at the time), thus paving the way for subsequent, often more complex experiments in installation art.
(5) Installation art and the meta-representational account of make-believe: writing and submitting a paper defending the view that when exploring works of installation art and engaging in prop oriented make-believe we use unreal beliefs to cast light on reality, thus producing real beliefs.
Expected scientific impact:
- On philosophers of art: (1) by offering the first full-fledged philosophical account of our engagement with installation art, I shall raise interest on installation art and prompt further research in philosophy of art; (1) by investigating the role of imaginative, affective, and introspective states of mind in the experience of installation art, I shall contribute to current debates in philosophy of mind and prompt further research in the field.
- On art theorists and practitioners: (1) by offering an insightful and refreshing view of IA, I shall raise interest in analytic philosophy of art; (2) I shall produce new knowledge on key issues, challenging traditional views (the literal character of IA; its non-definability) or reinforcing them (the relationship between abstract painting, Minimalism, and installation art).
- On the general public: The obscurity of the language employed by contemporary art practitioners to discuss artworks and describe them to the general public is an often debated topic. Through my outreach activities during the research project (talks, newspaper articles, instagram posts), as well as through an introductory monograph targeted to the general public which I aim to publish two years after the end of the research project, I shall provide refreshing, accessible information on IA, which will contribute to the improvement of the public’s cultural awareness competence (European Council Recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning, 22 May 2018, point 8), by introducing into the art jargon clearer language, notions, and arguments concerning IA.
- On high school students: I shall raise interest in research careers in the humanities, and in inter-disciplinary research.
Installation art has boomed since the 1950s: art-theoretical accounts of its origins, development and peculiarities abound (e.g. Reiss 1999; Bishop 2005). Among art theorists there is a consensus that installation art eludes definition, being too multifaceted. As for the public’s interaction with installation art, the prevalent art-theoretical view is grounded in Michael Fried’s seminal "Art and Objecthood" (1968) and it claims that works of installation art are sets of ‘literal’ objects that lack representational character and are supposed not to engage the imagination significantly, but rather to make us focus on our perceptual experience of them. Some philosophers have theorized about installation art’s cultural significance (e.g. Bourriaud 2002; Fischer-Lichte 2008) and, more recently, a few have focussed on its ontology and metaphysics (e.g. Irvin 2013; 2022). Philosophical research on the public’s engagement with installation art, however, is still very limited and lacking in depth. Juliane Rebentisch (2003) maintains that installation art generates an aesthetic appreciative experience, but she doesn’t provide a phenomenology of such experience, focusing instead mostly on defending the radical metaphysical view that works of installation art have no intrinsic objective being. Kenneth Wilder(2020) analyses how the spatial structure of certain works of installation art sometimes prompts the public to imagine certain fictional situations where she plays a role, but his proposal, although insightful, is limited to a few specific cases.
Overall objectives:
(1) Installation art and prop-oriented make-believe: (1a) writing and submitting a paper defending the view that some works of installation art typically invite us to engage in games of prop oriented make-believe; (1b) writing and submitting a paper defending the view that some works of installation art typically invite us to have affective reactions in response to them.
(2) A functional view of installation art: (2a) writing and submitting a paper defending the view that works of installation art are typically designed to arouse introspective experiences; (2b) writing and submitting a paper clarifying the notion of atmosphere, with the prospect of employing the notion to discuss installation art, among other things; (2c) writing and submitting a paper defending the view that some works of installation art are also designed to arouse atmospheric experiences.
(3) Against the literalist view of installation art: (3a) writing and submitting a paper defending the view that installation art is one of the spatial arts and highlighting similarities and differences between installation art and other spatial arts; (3b) writing and submitting a paper defending the view that installation art is not literal in that it has subject matter, as part of a broader account of artistic subject matter.
(4) Installation art, minimalims, and abstract painting: writing and submitting a paper offering a philosophical foundation for the art-theoretical view that Minimalism (e.g. Donald Judd’s and Carl Andre’s works) was the first artistic movement that, in the late 1950s, focused on real, beholder-including space as an alternative to the bi-dimensional constraints of abstract painting (the main avant-garde art practice at the time), thus paving the way for subsequent, often more complex experiments in installation art.
(5) Installation art and the meta-representational account of make-believe: writing and submitting a paper defending the view that when exploring works of installation art and engaging in prop oriented make-believe we use unreal beliefs to cast light on reality, thus producing real beliefs.
Expected scientific impact:
- On philosophers of art: (1) by offering the first full-fledged philosophical account of our engagement with installation art, I shall raise interest on installation art and prompt further research in philosophy of art; (1) by investigating the role of imaginative, affective, and introspective states of mind in the experience of installation art, I shall contribute to current debates in philosophy of mind and prompt further research in the field.
- On art theorists and practitioners: (1) by offering an insightful and refreshing view of IA, I shall raise interest in analytic philosophy of art; (2) I shall produce new knowledge on key issues, challenging traditional views (the literal character of IA; its non-definability) or reinforcing them (the relationship between abstract painting, Minimalism, and installation art).
- On the general public: The obscurity of the language employed by contemporary art practitioners to discuss artworks and describe them to the general public is an often debated topic. Through my outreach activities during the research project (talks, newspaper articles, instagram posts), as well as through an introductory monograph targeted to the general public which I aim to publish two years after the end of the research project, I shall provide refreshing, accessible information on IA, which will contribute to the improvement of the public’s cultural awareness competence (European Council Recommendation on key competences for lifelong learning, 22 May 2018, point 8), by introducing into the art jargon clearer language, notions, and arguments concerning IA.
- On high school students: I shall raise interest in research careers in the humanities, and in inter-disciplinary research.
So far, I have carried out the literature review, developed the arguments, written the papers, and presented the talks relevant to reaching objectives (1) to (3) - more details below. I have conducted my research at the University of Turin and, mostly, at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York. I have regularly discussed by work with my Turin advisor, Professor Alberto Voltolini, and with my CUNY advisor, Professor Jonathan Gilmore.
Objective (1a): partly achieved, the paper will soon be submitted and the objective fully achieved. The view has been presented and discussed in some talks.
Objective (1b): fully achieved. The paper has been published (Topoi). The view has been presented and discussed in some talks.
Objective (2a): partly achieved, the paper will soon be submitted and the objective fully achieved. The view has been presented and discussed in some talks.
Objective (2b): fully achieved.
Objective (2c): partly achieved, the paper will soon be submitted and the objective fully achieved.The view has been presented and discussed in some talks.
Objective (3a): fully achieved. The paper has been accepted for publication (British Journal of Aesthetics). The view has been presented and discussed in some talks.
Objective (3b): partly achieved, the paper will soon be submitted and the objective fully achieved.The view has been presented and discussed in some talks.
Objective (4): not yet achieved. Scheduled for third year of the research project.
Objective (5): not yet achieved. Scheduled for third year of the research project.
Objective (1a): partly achieved, the paper will soon be submitted and the objective fully achieved. The view has been presented and discussed in some talks.
Objective (1b): fully achieved. The paper has been published (Topoi). The view has been presented and discussed in some talks.
Objective (2a): partly achieved, the paper will soon be submitted and the objective fully achieved. The view has been presented and discussed in some talks.
Objective (2b): fully achieved.
Objective (2c): partly achieved, the paper will soon be submitted and the objective fully achieved.The view has been presented and discussed in some talks.
Objective (3a): fully achieved. The paper has been accepted for publication (British Journal of Aesthetics). The view has been presented and discussed in some talks.
Objective (3b): partly achieved, the paper will soon be submitted and the objective fully achieved.The view has been presented and discussed in some talks.
Objective (4): not yet achieved. Scheduled for third year of the research project.
Objective (5): not yet achieved. Scheduled for third year of the research project.
All the papers so far produced in the framework of this project go significantly beyond the state of the art. To my knowledge, no one had linked installation art and prop-oriented make-believe before, and no one had given a thorough account of the affective character of works of installation art. No one had philosophically investigated installation art in connection with introspection before, and no one had thoroughly investigated the atmospheric character of works of installation art. Finally, a full-fledged philosophical account of installation art in comparison with other spatial arts was missing, and there was no account of the subject matter of non-representational works of installation art.
Scientific impact:
So far, my research has reached philosophers mainly via 18 conference and invited talks (altogether about 200 people), via one published paper, and via one-to-one exchanges (involving around 40 colleagues internationally).
Societal impact:
The obscurity of the language employed by contemporary art practitioners to discuss artworks and describe them to the general public is a well-known issue among scholars. Through my outreach activities during the research project, I have sought to provide refreshing, accessible information on IA, by introducing into the art jargon clearer language, notions, and arguments concerning IA.
Impact on the researcher's career:
Short-term: So far, I have acquired greater expertise in the philosophy of fiction and of mind, and I have strengthened my profile as a philosopher of art with publications and talks. Importantly, at the beginning of the action I have been hired on a tenure-track contract (RTDb) by the University of Turin. I already hold the Italian accreditation as Associate Professor and I should make tenure in September 2026.
Scientific impact:
So far, my research has reached philosophers mainly via 18 conference and invited talks (altogether about 200 people), via one published paper, and via one-to-one exchanges (involving around 40 colleagues internationally).
Societal impact:
The obscurity of the language employed by contemporary art practitioners to discuss artworks and describe them to the general public is a well-known issue among scholars. Through my outreach activities during the research project, I have sought to provide refreshing, accessible information on IA, by introducing into the art jargon clearer language, notions, and arguments concerning IA.
Impact on the researcher's career:
Short-term: So far, I have acquired greater expertise in the philosophy of fiction and of mind, and I have strengthened my profile as a philosopher of art with publications and talks. Importantly, at the beginning of the action I have been hired on a tenure-track contract (RTDb) by the University of Turin. I already hold the Italian accreditation as Associate Professor and I should make tenure in September 2026.