Abstract
Attempts to describe aesthetic artefacts through informational models have existed at least since the late 1950s; but they have not been as successful as their proponents expected nor are they popular among art scholars because of their (mostly) quantitative nature. However, given how information technology has deeply shifted every aspect of our world, it is fair to ask whether aesthetic value continues to be immune to informational interpretations. This paper discusses the ideas of the late Russian biophysicist, Mikhail Volkenstein concerning art and aesthetic value. It contrasts them with Max Bense’s ‘information aesthetics’, and with contemporary philosophical understandings of information. Overall, this paper shows that an informational but not necessarily quantitative approach serves not only as an effective means to describe our interaction with artworks, but also contributes to explain why purely quantitative models struggle to formalise aesthetic value. Finally, it makes the case that adopting an informational outlook helps overcome the ‘analogue vs digital’ dichotomy by arguing the distinction is epistemological rather than ontological, and therefore the two notions need not be incompatible.
Highlights
Recent developments in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) have led to profound socio-cultural changes and paradigm shifts
Information is indistinguishable and interchangeable, there is no essential difference between one unit and the one, what we identify as the object-artwork is in truth a stable pattern, the sum and arrangement of a given number of units of information
Regarding artworks as complex systems which, at the very least, ‘say something about something else’ does not alone explain how or what type of information a given artwork might convey; nor does it solve all problems presented by aesthetic experience
Summary
Recent developments in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) have led to profound socio-cultural changes and paradigm shifts. A field historically wary of ‘technoscience’, have come to embrace ICTs and informational approaches through so-called ‘digital humanities’ institutes and programs. Computational technology is quintessentially informational, information-centric analyses of art continue to be rare. This has to do with the fact that information is still regarded by scholars in the arts and the humanities as a purely quantitative notion. It is associated with formalisation, and systematisation; modes of thinking that are seen as threats to art’s strongest features: its intuitive nature and its openness to interpretation
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
