![]() In conclusion, it is claimed that in contemporary artistic practices, historical and discursive distinctions between artistic and philosophical methods begin to blur. ![]() He finds in art a useful mode of inquiry that complements his own engagement with sociological and anthropological analysis. Next an account is given of Latour’s notable engagement with the art world and with artists. ![]() I begin by giving an account of the conditions of art in terms of three categories, all of which are rendered ambiguous through contemporary practice: style/epoch, object, and medium. Instead, the claim is that there is an equivalence between the way that Latour works and contemporary art practices. But, it is not argued that terms from Latour’s theory can be used to better understand contemporary art. The central claim is Latour works like an artist. In this paper, I consider Bruno Latour in the context of contemporary art. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |