Abstract
AbstractThe aesthetic theory of Graham Harman’s Object-Oriented Ontology (OOO) revolves around the concept of allure, a nonliteral experience of an object’s displacement from its qualities that draws attention to a deeper reality. But applying allure to aesthetic interpretation is hampered in two ways. First, OOO necessarily moves between the constrained viewpoint of experience and a more global perspective. Yet mixing these “inside” and “outside” views can risk ambiguity. Second, the phenomenological difference between the parts and qualities of an object must be clarified before Harman’s model of wholes and parts can be incorporated into OOO aesthetics. Addressing these two ambiguities will make it possible to further develop OOO’s resources for aesthetic commentary. For instance, one conclusion is that allure itself has two varieties: a tension between the object and its qualities (“allusion”) and a tension between the whole and its parts (“collusion”). These options parallel Harman’s twofold critique of reductionism. Another conclusion is that the literal needs an explanation within the framework of OOO insofar as it is a genuine feature of experience.
Highlights
Graham Harman memorably compares the metaphysical problem of causation, the main theme of ObjectOriented Ontology (OOO, “triple-O”), with aesthetic experience.[1]
The analogy makes otherwise abstract ideas about metaphysical problems more accessible, and it counters the prevailing tendency to ally the intellectual underpinnings of philosophy with the achievements of literalist enterprises such as science, law, and economic theory.[2]
Allure (RO-SQ) in one sense refers to the experience of a tense emanation of features from an inaccessible source and in another sense refers to the formation of an attachment
Summary
Graham Harman memorably compares the metaphysical problem of causation, the main theme of ObjectOriented Ontology (OOO, “triple-O”), with aesthetic experience.[1]. He sees only one pair as especially important for OOO aesthetics This is allure, the sporadic tension of a real object with sensual qualities (RO-SQ), in which the default bond between the encountered thing and its features breaks down and a hidden reality becomes at issue.[5] Out of deference to a tradition of discourse leading back to Kant and beyond, Harman uses the term beauty: “While the meaning of beauty is often left hopelessly vague, OOO defines it very precisely: as an RO-SQ split, the opening of a fissure between a real thing and its sensual qualities.”. Harman sometimes identifies cases of SO-SQ in aesthetic experience, but he is referring to a unique variant of allure that has not yet entered the OOO canon This variant, which I will call “collusion,” makes it possible to apply Harman’s negative critique of knowledge to the positive interpretation of aesthetic encounters. Literal content is a worthier topic for OOO than one might expect, given OOO’s anti-literalist stance – and that is where we find the true meaning of SO-SQ
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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.
