Call for papers

Itinera, 28 (2024)

 

Digital Aesthetics

Edited by Giulia Andreini and Renato Boccali (IULM University)

 

In 1936, Walter Benjamin addressed the great change triggered by the technical reproduction of images. At that time, new media such as photography and cinema were transforming not only the forms of art but also the way people perceived the world through new forms of collective innervation. In fact, it was the way humans looked at things that were profoundly changed. Through these new technologies, humans were learning to come closer to objects and play with their images. Like never before, these new media brought “optics” and “touch” to become closely interwoven, deeply affecting the arrangement of the human sensorium.

 

Today, the idea of an essential change in the way we perceive the world has become true in a way that largely exceeds Benjamin’s expectations. Digital technologies have become more than just mere instruments. These have either taken the form of three-dimensional computer-generated responsive environments in which users interact through their bodies (like virtual reality) or have been deeply integrated into the environment and into human’s bodily self, permeating and shaping his everyday experience (as AI and augmented or mixed reality). Providing us with a broad spectrum of experiences ranging from total and solitary immersion (Grau 2003) or absorption (Geniusas 2022), to shared digital experiences of co-presence (Schroeder 2006) and prosthetic enhancements of the body beyond its physical limitations and capabilities (Idhe 1993; Verbeek 2008), digital technologies trigger new senses of presence (Wiesing 2010; Slater and Sanchez-Vives, 2016), and of embodiment (Kilteni et al. 2012) through avatars (Gonzales-Franco and Peck 2018), as well as new forms of participative actor-spectatorship (Ljungar-Chapelon 2009; Bishop 2012).

 

This issue therefore welcomes contributions that address the new challenges that aesthetics, as a philosophical investigation of sensible knowledge (Baumgarten X), must face to properly seize the experiences provided by digital technologies. In fact, the digital reproduction, creation, transformation, and circulation of images, videos, texts, and sounds affect not only the domain of art (with the origin of new forms such as Virtual Art, Digital Photography, and AI Art), but also, more broadly, aesthesis as our habitual relationship with the world.

 

Encouraging an interdisciplinary dialogue, the call addresses the challenges that aesthetics as a discipline must face when dealing with digital media experience, prompting a critical reflection if not event a renewal of its main categories. Furthermore, the issue aims at collecting the works related to the Summer School on Digital Aesthetics, organized by the University of Milan in collaboration with the European Seminar of Aesthetics and with the Milano Painting Academy, which took place in Como from May 29 to June 1st, 2023.

 

The following is a non-exhaustive list of topics of interest to the issue regarding digital aesthetics:  

 

  1. Phenomenologies of the Digital. Digital technologies are setting new modes and new rhythms of fruition, prompting the reconfiguration of the human sensorium (Montani, 2020) and shaping the range of both actual and possible experiences. An applied approach to phenomenology (Lanfredini 2004; Kozel 2008), inquiring about the eidetic structures of the wide range of human experience can offer a rigorous method for the development of an aesthetic understanding of the digital. In return, such an analysis may prompt a reconsideration of both the phenomenological method and some of the theoretical constructs through which it seizes experience. Yet, to date, few studies have gone in the direction of a phenomenology of the digital (Champion 2019; O’Shiel 2022; Geniusas 2022). Which modality of consciousness is actualized in the interaction with digital media? Is the relation with digital images to be considered as a form of image consciousness, or does it also relate fantasia, perception, or illusion (Husserl 2005) and what consequences does it entail for phenomenology? Is it possible to draw an omni-comprehensive taxonomy of digital experiences, highlighting proximities and differences? What are the phenomenological implications of a body incorporating prosthetic devices and interacting with software? And can digital media encourage new modes of being with the other?

 

  1. Digital Photography. At its origins, photography has often been considered not so much as art, but rather as a reproductionof reality. Nevertheless, photographers have utilized this technology as an extraordinary means also to express content in an original way as well as to bring into visibility a world hidden to the human eye (Solnit 2003). With digital photography, the transformative power of pictures has become even more evident. Digital photographs can be manipulated at every step: colors, lights and even subjects can be changed and adapted to express the author’s intentions (Lipkin 2005). Can digital images still be considered as “photographs”? What is their relationship to reality? How can digital photographs tell the truth or convey true values (Mitchell 1994)? How does the spread of deepfakes affect the documental value of photography (Kalpokas and Kalpokiene 2022)?

 

  1. Digital Aesthetics and Values. Digital images and texts have become an expression of values, shared by many subjects. Such values don’t originate from a propositional process, rather, they are primarily felt (Husserl 1983). For this reason, it is essential to investigate how values can be created, transformed, and communicated through digital content. Can digital content convey a trueor authentic experience of values (Rozzoni and Conceiçao 2021)? Can the transformative power of digital technologies help to keep values alive? Or is it bound to bury them under a great quantity of fakes instead? How does the development of AI and deepfakes affect value transmission?

 

  1. Art and Artificial Intelligence. A very challenging type of art that emerged recently is certainly that made through AI. Can artificial intelligence be creative or does the “creativity” category only apply to human beings (Boden 2004; Colton and Wiggins 2012)? Is AI to be considered the author of these works, or is it still the human artist (Miller 2019; Barale 2020)? What does this type of art have to say about the new presence that AI represents in our society?

 

This issue will host only contributions written in English. The papers, written following Itinera’s editorial standards (https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/itinera/norme), will be between 25.000 and 40.000 characters.

Deadline: July, 31st, 2024

Release: December, 2024

Articles should be sent to the following addresses:

 

References

Barale, A. (ed.), Arte e intelligenza artificiale. Be My Gan, Jaca Book, Milano 2022.

Bishop, C., Artificial Hells: Participatory Art and the Politics of Spectatorship, Verso, London-New York 2012

Boden, M. A., The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms (1990), Routledge, London-New York 2004.

Champion, E., The Phenomenology of Real and Virtual Places, Routledge, London-New York 2019.

Colton, S., Wiggins, G. A., Computational Creativity: The Final Frontier?, in “Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications”, 242, 2012, pp. 21-26.

Geniusas, S., What Is Immersion? Towards a Phenomenology of Virtual Reality, in “Journal of Phenomenological Psychology”, 53 (1), 2022, pp. 1-24.

Gonzales-Franco, M., Peck, T. C., Avatar Embodiment. Towards a Standardized Questionnaire, in “Frontiers in Robotics and AI”, 5, 2018.

Grau, O., Virtual Art: From Illusion to Immersion, The MIT Press, Boston 2003. 

Husserl, E., Ideas Pertaining to a Pure Phenomenology and to a Phenomenological Philosophy. First Book: General Introduction to a Pure Phenomenology (1913), translated in English by F. Kersten, Martinus Nijhoff 1983.

Husserl, E, Phantasy, Image Consciousness, and Memory (1898-1925) (1980), translated in English by J. B. Brough, Springer, Dordrecht 2005.

Idhe, D., Philosophy of Technology. An Introduction, Paragon House Publishers, St. Paul (Minnesota) 1993.

Kalpokas, I., Kalpokiene, J., Deepfakes. A Realistic Assessment of Potentials, Risks, and Policy Regulation, Springer, Dordrecht 2022.

Kilteni, K., Groten, R., Slater, M., The Sense of Embodiment in Virtual Reality, in “Presence”, 21 (4), 2012, pp. 373-387.

Kozel, S., Closer: Performance, Technologies, Phenomenology, The MIT Press, Boston 2008.

Lanfredini, R. (ed.), Fenomenologia applicata. Esempi di analisi descrittiva,  Guerini e Associati, Milano 2004.

Lipkin, J., Photography Reborn: Image Making in the Digital Era, Harry N. Abrams, New York 2005.

Ljungar-Chapelon, M., Actor-Spectator in a Virtual Reality Arts Play, Doctoral Thesis, University of Gothenburg 2009.

Miller, A. I., The Artist in The Machine: The World of AI-Powered Creativity, The MIT Press, Boston 2019.

Mitchell, W. T. J., Picture Theory. Essays on Verbal and Visual Representation, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1994.

Montani, P., Emozioni dell’intelligenza. Un percorso nel sensorio digitale, Meltemi Editore, Roma 2020.

O’Shiel, D., The Phenomenology of Virtual Technology. Perception and Imagination in a Digital Age, Bloomsbury Publishing, London 2022.

Rozzoni, C., Conceiçao, N. (eds.), Aesthetics and Values: Contemporary Perspectives, Mimesis International, Milano 2021.

Schroeder, R., Being There Together and the Future of Connected Presence, in “Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments”, 15 (4), 2006, pp. 438-454.

Slater, M., Sanchez-Vives, M. V., Enhancing our Lives with Immersive Virtual Reality, in “Frontiers in Robotics and AI”, 3 (74), 2016.

Solnit, R., Rivers of Shadows: Eadweard Muybridge and the Technological Wild West, Penguins Books, New York 2003.

Verbeek, P. -P., Cyborg Intentionality: Rethinking the Phenomenology of Human-Technology Relations, in “Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences”, 7 (3), 2008, pp. 387-395.

Wiesing, L., Artificial Presence. Philosophical Studies in Image Theory, Standford University Press, Stanford 2010.

 

Itinera, 27 (2024)

Envisioning Future Landscapes

 

edited by Ivana Randazzo and Federico Vercellone

 

The environmental and social crisis that marks our times arouses a need for new scenarios and urges to reflect on what could be the landscapes of the future. At the 18th Venice Architecture Biennale have been exhibited many imagined landscapes of this kind: from a moonscape where raw materials are mined, to buildings by which condensation from the air-conditioning systems is collected to water plants, so that nothing is wasted (Sweating Assets, Bahrain Pavilion).

This complexity stirs the imagination to update its relationship with science and technology. The concern for the future prompts engineers, biologists, architects, artists and thinkers to design new landscapes for different, more sustainable lifestyles, that everyone can adopt. Just as wide will be the spread of urban and productive landscapes due to automation and robotics, and functional to the “infosphere”. But all of this needs to be supported by a philosophical commitment which deals with topics like the increasingly widespread role of public art and envisions new urban structures and spaces.

From the planning of new cities such as The Line (Saudi Arabia) in which all community life is organized along a “strip” (according to the “Las Vegas model”) to scenarios in which human spaces are re-naturalized, many contemporary tendencies show the will to search for new ways to connect the human settlements and the world, foreshadowing alternative configurations of the landscape as an artificial, engineered element.

Since a landscape cristallizes the basic features of a culture, its modes of production, its aesthetic and psychological identities, has become urgent to face questions such as how landscapes will meet human desires and needs in the near future. While already artificial spaces, left behind by the mankind, come back to nature, remains to understand in which way technological development can coexist with the respect for the environment and which bio-technological forms of existence will become our way of life.

The issue will therefore contain papers discussing the landscape as an architectural, urban and aesthetic problem, with a special interest for the relationship between these contexts and the new technologies. Below some possible topics:

 

 

  • Public Art
  • Ecological Crisis
  • Biogenetics
  • New Urbanism
  • Information Technologies
  • Technological Imagery

 

 

Deadline for submission: April, 2024

Expected release: July, 2024

 The accepted languages are Italian, English, French and Spanish.

Submissions should be sent to:

Ivana Randazzo: ivana.randazzo@unict.it

 

References: 

 

Clement G., Manifesto del terzo paesaggio, Quodlibet, 2016.

Floridi L., La quarta rivoluzione. Come l’infosfera sta trasformando il mondo, Raffaello Cortina Editore, 2017.

Lingiardi V., Mindscapes, Cortina, 2017.

Venturi Ferriolo M., Paesaggi in movimento. Per un'estetica della trasformazione, DeriveApprodi, 2016.

Wilk E., Death by Landscape, Soft Skull Press, 2022.

 

Itinera, 27 (2024)

Paesaggi del futuro e nuovi immaginari

a cura di Ivana Randazzo e Federico Vercellone

La crisi ambientale e sociale che contraddistingue il nostro secolo comporta una riflessione e un desiderio di nuovi scenari e paesaggi del futuro. Alla 18° Biennale di Architettura di Venezia erano molti i paesaggi del futuro immaginati. L’estensione dei paesaggi in cui il futuro promette di farci vivere è ampia e va da un paesaggio lunare al quale ci si rivolge per la ricerca di materie prime a quello in cui dai grossi impianti di condizionatori degli edifici si utilizza l’acqua condensata per la coltivazione delle piante così da non sprecare nulla (Sweating Assets, Padiglione del Bahrein). Questa complessità suscita l’attivarsi di un’immaginazione che rinnova il rapporto con la scienza e con la tecnica. È chiaro che dagli ingegneri ai biologi agli architetti sino al mondo dell’arte è forte la preoccupazione per un paesaggio del futuro capace di generare forme di vita in cui sia dato riconoscersi, anche in questo senso maggiormente sostenibile. Altrettanto vasta è e sarà la gamma di paesaggi urbani e produttivi scaturiti dall’automazione e dalla robotica, dall’“infosfera”. Ma tutto ciò non può che essere accompagnato da una riflessione filosofica che dovrà includere tra i suoi argomenti anche la presenza sempre più diffusa di arte pubblica ed immaginare nuovi volti e nuovi spazi urbani

A partire dal progetto di nuove città come The Line in cui tutta la vita viene organizzata lungo una “strip” (riprendendo il modello di Las Vegas) a scenari in cui si ri-naturalizzano gli spazi pubblici sono molti i segnali di una ansia di ricerca verso modi nuovi per definire il rapporto tra l’insediamento umano e il mondo, prefigurando configurazioni alternative di quell’elemento artificiale, progettato, che è il paesaggio.

Poiché nel paesaggio si materializzano le scelte fondamentali di una civiltà, il suo modo di produrre, la sua immaginazione estetica e la sua dimensione psichica è diventato urgente l’interrogativo su quali potranno essere i paesaggi coerenti con i desideri e le esigenze dell’umanità nel prossimo avvenire. Mentre spazi già artificiali, abbandonati dall’uomo, tornano alla natura, rimane da chiedersi in che modo possano convivere sviluppo tecnologico e rispetto ambientale e quali forme di vita bio-tecnologiche diverranno il nostro way of life.

 

Il fascicolo accoglierà dunque contributi che analizzino il tema del paesaggio in ambito architettonico, urbanistico ed estetico con una particolare attenzione per il rapporto tra paesaggio e nuove tecnologie. Di seguito qualche possibile tema:

 

  • Arte pubblica
  • Crisi ecologica
  • Bio-genetica
  • Neo-città
  • Tecnologie dell’informazione
  • Immaginazione tecnologica

 

Deadline for submission: aprile 2024

Expected realease: luglio 2024

 

Le lingue accettate sono l’italiano, l’inglese, il francese e lo spagnolo.

Gli articoli devono essere inviati a:

Ivana Randazzo: ivana.randazzo@unict.it

 

Bibliografia

 

Clement G., Manifesto del terzo paesaggio Quodlibet, 2016.

Floridi L., La quarta rivoluzione. Come l’infosfera sta trasformando il mondo, Raffaello Cortina Editore, 2017.

Lingiardi V., Mindscapes, Cortina, 2017.

Venturi Ferriolo M., Paesaggi in movimento. Per un'estetica della trasformazione, DeriveApprodi, 2016.

Wilk E., Death by Landscape, Soft Skull Press, 2022.

 

 

Itinera, 27 (2024)

Memory and Poiesis between Aesthetics and Rhetoric

Edited by Amalia Salvestrini and Fosca Mariani Zini

Among the various fields that have historically contributed to the constitution of Aesthetics as an autonomous discipline in the 18th century is rhetoric, from which Aesthetics has taken terms, concepts and problems that it later develops and transforms (Saint Girons; Franzini; etc.). One of the themes with which the relationship between Aesthetics and Rhetoric can be investigated is memory, understood in its poietic dimension that concerns various fields of human productive and artistic activity.

The issue will be divided into two sections: the first will specifically explore the theme of memory, the second will open the debate around the possibility of the relationship between Aesthetics and Rhetoric.

 

Section I

Memory, the fourth part of rhetoric after inventio, dispositio, elocutio and before actio, has not only a receptive dimension, so to speak, in which experiential data are deposited, and in particular, as far as rhetoric is concerned, the elements of the discourse to be delivered are deposited in an organised manner. Memory also has a poietic, creative dimension, which is in some ways connected to inventio and which reworks acquired data. Thanks to its structure, whether natural or artificial, memory not only provides the places within which to organise discourse, but also the inventive basis for the creative elaboration of data. In the interaction between inventio and memoria, i.e. between the ability to find the appropriate arguments and the reasoning schemes that structure the rhetorical memory, the poietic and creative activity is generated, and enables the production of something new, a work, such as speech in the case of the rhetorician. The dislocation of rhetorical concepts in different disciplines, visible for example in the use of the rhetoric conveniens or decor in other disciplines such as theology or architecture, makes one reflect on the possibility that rhetorical memory, and specifically the poietic meaning of memory, also goes to structure cognitive and productive processes in other spheres.

In classical rhetoric, and Ciceronian rhetoric in particular (see F. Yates, The Art of Memory), the poietic value of memory emerges in the possibility of arranging in “artificially” reorganised mental spaces the material of discourse and thereby constructing it. Poiesis thus occurs as much in the construction of a memory building, as attested to by the numerous architectural metaphors that delimit the spaces ready to accommodate the discursive material. For example, it happens in the composition of the discourse itself, when its elements are first found (inventio) among the available loci, to be later fixed in the memory building, once congruously arranged according to the rules of the aptum and ornatus.

Mary Carruthers’ studies have amply shown how in the early Middle Ages memory techniques were used for meditation on the sacred page, contributing to the construction of veritable edifices of thought in which material was not only neatly conserved, but also available and rearranged in a variety of ways. There is the fabrication of mental images or cognitive frameworks for thinking and composing, but also monastic art develops in the sense of an "aesthetic of memory" rather than representation and mimesis. In addition, memory acquires the role of a "cogitation matrix" in order to retrieve and reconfigure memories according to a "random access mnemonic scheme", following a "memorial architecture".

In the light of these premises, the central question arises around which this call intends to gather contributions in order to outline possible answers: to what extent have the modes of poiesis been given according to a rhetorical space, inventive rather than receptive, of memory?

We welcome contributions on any historical period, from antiquity to the contemporary, and in any philosophical and artistic sphere (painting, music, architecture, etc.) that intend to pay attention to poietic forms that have enacted rhetorical structures and strategies of memory. This kind of enactment can be found both at the level of the project, i.e. of conception, and at the level of the work and its aesthetic fruition, where for example an element of the (art)work is assumed as a place of memory with a precise “persuasive” purpose.

 

The main question concerning the rhetorical scope of human poiesis can thus be articulated in the following areas:

  • Memory in the process of poietic conception
  • The work as sedimentation of memory and inventive openness
  • The sites of memory and the rhetorical effects on the passions
  • Memory and rhetoric in the arts (painting, architecture, music, etc.)

 

Section II

The issue also includes a more general section aimed at stimulating theoretical and historiographical debate around the possibility of the relationship between aesthetics and rhetoric. The dialectic between reason and sensibility, demonstration and argumentation is one of the theoretical points on which the debate has been conducted at least in the last century (e.g. Perelman and Preti), even though it has its roots in history. Reflections on the relationship between aesthetics and rhetoric have also resulted around specific aesthetic concepts of rhetorical origin, such as the sublime and metaphor, but have also involved issues both relating to knowledge in the context of postmodern perspectives on the undermining of truth (Gruppo µ), and relating to the rhetorical (social and artistic) strategies of the postmodern (Baudrillard).

 

The issue welcomes contributions that want to deepen the following themes, or others inspired by the perspective outlined here.

  • Demonstration/argumentation
  • Reason/feeling
  • Text and image
  • Sublime between aesthetics and rhetoric
  • Metaphor and knowledge
  • Rhetoric and postmodernism
  • Arts (painting, music, theatre, cinema, etc.) and rhetoric

 

Both articles and short notes on this topic will be accepted for this section.

 

Article deadline: 30 November 2023

Expected release: July 2024

 

Articles can be written in Italian, French and English

 

Articles should be sent to the following addresses:

- Amalia Salvestrini (amalia.salvestrini@gmail.com)

- Fosca Mariani Zini (fosca.mariani@univ-tours.fr)

 

The texts, prepared according to editorial standards (https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/itinera/norme), will be between 25,000 and 40,000 characters.

 

Itinera, 27 (2024)

Memoria e poiesi tra estetica e retorica

a cura di Amalia Salvestrini e Fosca Mariani Zini

Tra i diversi ambiti che nella storia hanno contribuito a costituire l’estetica come disciplina autonoma nel XVIII secolo, vi è la retorica, da cui l’estetica ha ripreso termini, concetti e problemi che successivamente sviluppa e trasforma (Saint Girons; Franzini; ecc.). Uno dei temi con cui si può indagare la relazione tra estetica e retorica è la memoria, intesa nella sua dimensione poietica che riguarda vari campi delle attività produttive e artistiche umane.

Il fascicolo sarà articolato in due sezioni: nella prima si indagherà specificamente il tema della memoria, nella seconda si apre il dibattito intorno alla possibilità dei rapporti tra estetica e retorica.

 

Sezione I

La memoria, quarta parte della retorica dopo inventio, dispositio, elocutio e prima dell’actio, ha non ha solo una dimensione per così dire ricettiva, in cui si sedimentano i dati esperienziali, e in particolare, per quanto riguarda la retorica, si depositano in modo organizzato gli elementi del discorso da pronunciare. La memoria ha anche una dimensione poietica, creativa, per certi versi collegata alla inventio e che rielabora i dati acquisiti. Grazie alla sua struttura, sia essa naturale o artificiale, la memoria fornisce i luoghi entro cui organizzare il discorso, ma anche la base inventiva per la rielaborazione creativa dei dati. Nell’interazione tra inventio e memoria, cioè tra la capacità di trovare gli argomenti appropriati e gli schemi di ragionamento che strutturano la memoria retorica, si genera l’attività poietica e creativa che permette di produrre qualche cosa di nuovo, un’opera, come il discorso nel caso del retore. Il dislocamento dei concetti retorici in differenziate discipline, visibile ad esempio nell’utilizzo del conveniens o del decor retorici in altre discipline come in teologia o in architettura, fa riflettere sulla possibilità che anche la memoria retorica, e specificamente quella intesa nella sua valenza poietica, vada a strutturare processi conoscitivi e produttivi di altri ambiti.

Nella retorica classica, ciceroniana in particolare (si veda F. Yates, L'arte della memoria), la valenza poietica della memoria emerge nella possibilità di disporre negli spazi mentali riorganizzati “artificialmente” il materiale del discorso e con ciò costruirlo. La poiesi si ha quindi tanto nella costruzione di un edificio della memoria, come attestano le numerose metafore architettoniche che delimitano gli spazi pronti ad accogliere il materiale discorsivo, quanto nella composizione stessa del discorso, quando cioè i suoi elementi vengono dapprima trovati (inventio) tra i loci disponibili, per poi essere fissati nell’edificio della memoria, una volta disposti congruamente secondo le regole dell’aptum e dell’ornatus.

Gli studi di Mary Carruthers hanno mostrato ampiamente come nell’alto medioevo le tecniche della memoria fossero utilizzate per la meditazione sulla Sacra pagina, contribuendo a costruire veri e propri edifici di pensiero in cui il materiale non solo fosse ordinatamente conservato, ma anche disponibile e ridisposto secondo variegati modi. Vi è la fabbricazione di immagini mentali o quadri cognitivi per pensare e comporre, ma anche l’arte monastica si sviluppa nel senso di una “estetica della memoria” più che della rappresentazione e della mimesi. Inoltre, la memoria acquisisce il ruolo di “matrice di cogitazione” al fine di riprendere e riconfigurare i ricordi secondo uno “schema mnemonico ad accesso random”, secondo una “architettura memoriale”.

Alla luce di queste premesse si pone la domanda centrale intorno alla quale questa call intende raccogliere contributi per delineare risposte possibili: quanto i modi della poiesi si sono dati secondo uno spazio retorico, inventivo più che ricettivo, della memoria?

Si accolgono contributi su qualsiasi periodo storico, dall’antichità al contemporaneo, e ambito filosofico e artistico (pittura, musica, architettura, ecc.) che intendano porre attenzione a forme poietiche che abbiano messo in opera strutture e strategie retoriche della memoria, tanto a livello progettuale, cioè di ideazione, quanto a livello dell’opera e della fruizione estetica, là dove ad esempio un elemento dell’opera è assunto come luogo della memoria con un preciso scopo “persuasivo”.

 

La questione principale relativa alla portata retorica della poiesi umana potrà quindi essere articolata negli ambiti seguenti:

  • La memoria nel processo di ideazione poietica
  • L’opera come sedimentazione di memoria e apertura inventiva
  • I luoghi della memoria e gli effetti retorici sulle passioni
  • Memoria e retorica nelle arti (pittura, architettura, musica, ecc.)

 

 

Sezione II

Il fascicolo prevede anche una sezione più generale volta a suscitare il dibattito teoretico e storiografico intorno alla possibilità dei rapporti tra estetica e retorica. La dialettica tra ragione e sensibilità, dimostrazione e argomentazione rappresenta uno dei punti teorici su cui svolge il dibattito almeno nell’ultimo secolo (ad esempio Perelman e Preti), seppure affondi le sue radici nella storia. La riflessione sui rapporti tra estetica e retorica hanno altresì un esito intorno a specifici concetti estetici di origine retorica, come il sublime e la metafora, ma ha coinvolto anche temi sia relativi alla conoscenza nel contesto delle prospettive postmoderne di indebolimento della verità (Gruppo µ), sia relativi alle strategie retoriche (sociali e artistiche) del postmoderno (Baudrillard).

Il fascicolo accoglie contributi che vogliano approfondire le tematiche seguenti, o altre ispirate alla prospettiva qui delineata.

  • Dimostrazione/argomentazione
  • Ragione/sentimento
  • Testo e immagine
  • Sublime tra estetica e retorica
  • Metafora e conoscenza
  • Retorica e postmoderno
  • Arti (pittura, musica, teatro, cinema, ecc.) e retorica

 

Per questa sezione si accoglieranno sia articoli che brevi note sull’argomento

 

Deadline articoli: 30 novembre 2023

Expected release: luglio 2024

 

Gli articoli possono essere scritti in italiano, francese e inglese

 

Gli articoli devono essere inviati ai seguenti indirizzi:

 

I testi, redatti secondo le norme editoriali (https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/itinera/norme), saranno compresi tra le 25 mila e le 40 mila battute.

 

 

 

CALL FOR PAPERS, ARCHIVE (only most recent ones):

 

Itinera, 26 (2023)

Habit and literature

Edited by Alessandra Aloisi (University of Oxford), Marco Piazza (Università Roma Tre), Sofia Sandreschi de Robertis (Università Roma Tre)

 

The reflection on the concept of habit traverses the entire history of Western philosophy, first as Aristotelian hexis or Christian habitus, and then again as habit in English empiricism or habitude in the 19th-century French tradition. In the 20th century, In the 20th century, many authors proved to be interested in habit, both in France (Bergson, Deleuze, Merleau-Ponty, and Ricoeur) and in the Anglo-Saxon world (Dewey, James, and Peirce). Recently, this concept has received new interest, especially in terms of the historical reconstruction of its formulations and, among the numerous studies, many have recognised in habit a true crossroads between literature and philosophy.

Besides being a philosophical concept, the term “habit” is also part of the everyday vocabulary. As a backdrop to everyday existence, habits condition human behaviour in all its different manifestations, so much so that personal identity itself derives from a complex web of habits. Reference to literature, whether in the form of prose, poetry or drama, is then obvious: just think, for example, of Proust, Svevo, Beckett, or Stendhal. It is no coincidence that Ricoeur, in his theory of narrative identity, describes habit as that set of distinctive signs that always allow an individual to be identified as “the same”, despite all possible changes they go through.

In this sense, the theme of habit brings attention to several interrelated questions, such as the body-mind relationship, the problem of time and the (re)construction of identity, on the meaning of what is perceived familiar or unfamiliar, on the role of memory, and the articulation between the conscious and the unconscious.

 

This issue therefore welcomes contributions that explore the philosophical meaning of the concept of habit as it is represented in literary texts, highlighting points of contact with existing philosophical theories. Here are some possible areas of research:

 

  • The role of habit in the creative process
  • Habit and the shaping of character
  • Spiritual habits and/or the habits of the body
  • Habit, time, and identity
  • Habit between attention and distraction
  • The habits of the subject or the subject of habits
  • Habit as pharmakon

 

Deadline for submission: 15 July 2023

Expected release: December 2023

 

Papers can be written in English, Italian and French.

Submissions must be sent to:

Sofia Sandreschi de Robertis: sofia.sandreschi@uniroma3.it

  

Itinera, 26 (2023)

Abitudine e letteratura

A cura di Alessandra Aloisi (University of Oxford), Marco Piazza (Università Roma Tre), Sofia Sandreschi de Robertis (Università Roma Tre)

 

La riflessione sul concetto di abitudine attraversa tutta la storia della filosofia occidentale, dapprima come hexisaristotelica o habitus cristiano, e poi ancora come habit nell’empirismo inglese o habitude nella tradizione ottocentesca francese. Nel Novecento sono numerosi gli autori che se ne interessano, sia in area francese (Bergson, Deleuze, Merleau-Ponty e Ricoeur), sia in area anglosassone (Dewey, James, Peirce). Di recente è fiorito un rinnovato interesse nei confronti di questo concetto, soprattutto nei termini di una ricostruzione storica delle sue formulazioni, ma non mancano gli studi che riconoscono nell’abitudine un vero e proprio luogo d’incontro fra letteratura e filosofia.

Oltre a essere un concetto filosofico, il termine, al tempo stesso, fa parte del lessico corrente di tutti noi. Facendo da sfondo all’esistenza quotidiana, l’abitudine condiziona il comportamento dell’uomo in ogni sua manifestazione, al punto tale che la stessa identità personale si manifesta in un complesso intreccio di abitudini. Il riferimento alla letteratura, sotto forma di prosa, di poesia o di drammaturgia, è allora inevitabile: basti a pensare, solo a titolo di esempio, ai capolavori di Proust, Svevo, Beckett o Stendhal. Non è un caso che Ricoeur, nella sua teoria dell’identità narrativa, descriva l’abitudine come quell’insieme di segni distintivi che permettono sempre di identificare un certo individuo come “lo stesso”, nonostante tutti i possibili mutamenti.

In questo senso il tema dell’abitudine focalizza l’attenzione sul rapporto fra il corpo e lo spirito, sul problema del tempo e della (ri)costruzione dell’identità, sul senso di ciò che appare ora familiare ora estraneo, sul ruolo della memoria e infine sull’articolazione del conscio e dell’inconscio.

Il fascicolo accoglie dunque contributi che approfondiscano il senso filosofico del concetto di abitudine così come si manifesta nella produzione letteraria, mettendone altresì in luce i punti di contatto con le diverse teorie filosofiche esistenti su questo tema. Di seguito qualche possibile spunto di riflessione:

 

  • Il ruolo dell’abitudine nel processo creativo
  • Abitudine e costruzione del personaggio
  • Abitudini spirituali e/o abitudini del corpo
  • Abitudine, tempo e identità
  • Abitudine fra attenzione e distrazione
  • Le abitudini del soggetto o il soggetto delle abitudini
  • Abitudine come phármakon

 

Deadline for submission: 15 luglio 2023

Expected realease: dicembre 2023

 

Le lingue accettate sono l’italiano, l’inglese e il francese.

Gli articoli devono essere inviati a:

Sofia Sandreschi de Robertis: sofia.sandreschi@uniroma3.it

 

 

 

 

 

Itinera, 26 (2023)

Mimesis as conditio humana

Edited by Salvatore Tedesco e Valeria Maggiore

The concept of Mimesis originates in the Greek context in the 5th century BC. and since then, it has been at the heart of Western aesthetic reflection. Indeed, the classical paradigm of mimesis has its roots in the platonic dialogues Republic and Sophist and finds its best-known formulation in the Aristotelian affirmation according to which “art imitates nature” (Physics II, 2, 194a 21- 27). Starting with this definition, aestheticians have traditionally questioned themselves about the “passive” role of mimetic practices (why does art feel the need to imitate reality? What kind of strategies have been used to operate this imitation?); however, as Christoph Wulf pointed out, «mimesis cannot be understood in a restrictive way concerning art, poetry, aesthetics. The mimetic faculty plays a role in almost all areas of human acting, representing, speaking, and thinking» (C. Wulf, Mimesis, l’arte e i suoi modelli, Mimesis, Milano, 1995, p. 9): it is conditio humana. Therefore, it must not be comprehended in a narrow sense as the mere reproduction of copies, but its field of investigation must also take into account an “active” meaning of the term since it also indicates a process that leads us to aesthetically come into contact with external reality and to creatively reproduce its traits even in our own body. This meaning is already present in the famous Aristotelian statement mentioned above: it is inserted in a work in which the philosopher of Stagira deals with the subjects and causes of natural becoming (i.e. of those processes whose principle is in the object itself, an object that evolves) and, from an accurate contextual reading of these words, we can understand that art does not limit itself to "taking nature as a reference model for its production" but "operates like nature itself" because it is identical to it in the way of proceeding. It is in this complexity, which connects the notion of mimesis not only to the terms of imitation and verisimilitude but also to those of individual plasticity and autopoiesis, that the topicality of the question lies.

The issue of “Itinera” is therefore dedicated to the analysis of these issues, starting from the traditional definition of mimesis up to its most recent interpretations. Here are some possible areas for discussion:

  • The Greek definition of mimesisand its implications in philosophical debate;
  • The history of the concept of mimesisand its possible contemporary interpretations;
  • The relationship between art and nature in the light of the concept of mimesis;
  • Mimesisas production of appearances: poetry, plastic arts and digital images;
  • Mimesisand plasticity;
  • Mimetic activity as an anthropological and social practice.

 

Deadline for submission: July 15th, 2023

Expected Release: Decembre 2023

Papers can be written in English, Italian and French.

Submissions must be sent to: valeria.maggiore@unipa.it

Salvatore Tedesco (salavtore.tedesco@unipa.it)

Valeria Maggiore (valeria.maggiore@unipa.it)

 

 

Itinera, 26 (2023)

Mimesis come conditio humana

A cura di Salvatore Tedesco e Valeria Maggiore

Il concetto di Mimesis prende forma in ambito greco nel V secolo a.C. e da allora si colloca al cuore della riflessione estetica occidentale. Il paradigma classico della mimesis affonda, infatti, le sue radici nella Repubblica e nel Sofista di Platone e trova la sua formulazione forse più nota nella celebre affermazione aristotelica secondo la quale «l’arte imita la natura» (Fisica II, 2, 194a 21-27). Facendo appello a tale definizione gli studiosi di estetica si sono tradizionalmente interrogati sul ruolo “passivo” delle pratiche mimetiche (perché l’arte sente il bisogno di imitare il reale? Quali sono le strategie messe in campo per operare tale imitazione?); tuttavia, come sottolineato da Christoph Wulf, «la mimesis non può essere ristretta all’arte, alla poesia, all’estetica. La facoltà mimetica gioca un ruolo in pressoché tutti gli ambiti dell’agire, del rappresentare, del parlare e pensare degli uomini» (C. Wulf, Mimesis, l’arte e i suoi modelli, Mimesis, Milano, 1995, p. 9): essa è conditio humana. Non deve quindi essere intesa in senso ristretto come la mera riproduzione di copie, ma il suo campo d’indagine deve tener conto anche di un’accezione “attiva” del termine, poiché essa indica anche il processo che ci porta a entrare esteticamente in contatto con la realtà esteriore e a riprodurne creativamente i tratti nel nostro stesso corpo. Tale accezione è, infatti, anch’essa già presente nella celebre affermazione aristotelica, inserita in un’opera in cui il filosofo di Stagira tratta i soggetti e le cause del divenire naturale, cioè di quei processi il cui principio è nell’oggetto stesso che diviene: da un’accurata lettura contestuale si comprende che l’arte non si limita a prendere la natura a modello di riferimento per il suo produrre ma opera come la natura stessa, perché è a essa identica quanto al modo di procedere. È in questa complessità, che connette la nozione di mimesis non solo ai termini d’imitazione e verosimiglianza, ma anche a quelli di plasticità individuale e autopoiesi, che risiede l’attualità della questione.

Il numero di “Itinera” è quindi dedicato all’analisi di tali questioni, prendendo le mosse dalla tradizionale definizione di mimesis fino alle sue più recenti interpretazioni. Di seguito si riportano alcuni possibili ambiti di discussione:

  • La definizione greca di mimesis e le sue implicazioni nel dibattito filosofico;
  • La storia del concetto di mimesis e le sue possibili interpretazioni contemporanee;
  • La relazione tra arte e natura alla luce del concetto di mimesis;
  • La mimesis come produzione di apparenze: poesia, arti plastiche e immagini digitali;
  • Mimesis e plasticità;
  • L’attività mimetica come pratica antropologica e sociale.

 

Deadline for submission: 15 luglio, 2023

Expected Release: Dicembre 2023

Gli articoli possono essere scritti in inglese, italiano e francese.

Le proposte devono essere inviate a: 

Salvatore Tedesco (salavtore.tedesco@unipa.it)

Valeria Maggiore (valeria.maggiore@unipa.it)

 

 

Itinera, 25(2023)

The Performing Arts and Architecture

Edited by Paolo Furia, Serena Massimo, Rita Messori and Federico Vercellone

 

The increasing centrality conferred to the performative character of artistic practices, namely, their ability to involve spectators directly and pervasively (Dixon 2007), imbues the relationship between architecture, the performing arts, and the spectator’s experience with a relevance that is worthy of further investigation. Noteworthy, for example, is the role played by digital technologies – “liquid architectures” (Novak 1991) – which contribute to the creation of interactive performing spaces that intensify the participatory and immersive nature of performances. The sharing of the scenic space by spectators and performers is, in fact, essential for the co-production of a common energy which acts as a “transforming force” and thereby opens up the shared experience of discovering oneself and the other as a union of the body and the mind (Fischer-Lichte 2004).

The critique of the traditional conception of scenic space – which began in the second half of the twentieth century –and the establishment of a new relationship with the natural and urban environment are decisive for overcoming the distinction between performers and spectators. The identification of the scenic space as a “metonymic” space, i.e. a continuum of the real (Lehmann 1999), and the choice of urban spaces – streets, factories, dumps, prisons …– as places for artistic performances, make architecture a key element of the spectator’s experience. This identification supports the broader goal of replacing the idea of space as a mere background of social action with that of an implicit and circumstantial dimension of action (Casey 1997). As “guests of the same space” (Ibid.), spectators and performers are actors in the reactivation of artistic spaces, a reactivation that in turn results from the influence exerted on them by architectural spaces, which, by leaving their impression on performers and spectators in the form of “corpography” (Martínez Sánchez 2021), solicit the latter explore new ways of movement, expression, and interaction. Of course, particularly in the case of abandoned spaces, the performing arts also overcome the paralysis of social action that marks ruin (Simmel 1911) and that is somewhat perpetuated by “ruin porn aesthetics” (Siobhan 2018). Thus, the performance prefigures possible reinterpretations of space in the direction of a possible habitation, which remains the embodied destination of building (Heidegger 1951, Ricoeur 2016).

Performers’ and spectators’ bodily, affective, and dynamic experiences of architectonic spaces thus reactivate the affective and performative nature of architecture. By hosting bodily actions that, in a performative way, give continuity to the bodily process involved in the construction of these same architectonic spaces, architecture itself appears as a performing art (Gomez 2003). This call therefore aims to address the connections between architecture and the performing arts in its various aspects and from multiple points of view. Some of the topics that may be discussed are:

  • The relationship between performance and representation. Performance is usually considered to be an aesthetic practice involving both artists and spectators in the here and now. While representational approaches in aesthetics emphasize the role of sight over the other senses and lead to the hypostatization of an observational subject detached from its surroundings (Berleant 1991), a stronger focus on practices leads to the exaltation of the multisensorial, embodied, and immersive character of aesthetic experience. Both landscapes and urban environments are considered differently in representational and non-representational approaches. Moreover, in the last twenty years one can note a growing interest in non-representational approaches in both human geography (Thrift 2007) and architecture (Kozlowski 2020). It has been maintained that representation and practices should not be contraposed, as representations of space play a key role in planning and building and help to shape the meanings of practices themselves (Lorimer 2005). Papers should address issues regarding how the performative turn has transformed both the theory and the practice of architecture, and how representational and non-representational elements are intermingled in contemporary architectural practices.

 

  • The performing arts and public art. An emblematic example of the synergy between the performativity of architecture and the performativity of the performing arts is the impact of performances based on the direct involvement of the local area and its inhabitants. By offering a participatory collective experience, such performances connect the private to the public sphere – a form of “communing” (Chatterton 2010) – in order to transform the public space into a “common” space (Gurney 2015) whose activation and reconnection is carried out by the users themselves (Mitrache 2012). This explains the involvement of the performing arts in urban regeneration projects thanks to their ability, on the one hand, to convey and thereby enhance the performative action of architectural contexts and, on the other hand, to inspire architectural design itself (Sieni 2021). By acting itself as a “performer” (Rufford 2019), architecture offers – also in an experimental way (Jackson 2011) – spaces that simultaneously welcome a “community” of performative actions and artistic practices, thus strengthening the link between the latter and everyday life and enhancing their social function. Examples of this include the Pistoletto Foundation (Biella) and Centquatre#104 (Paris). Papers should explore how the performativity of architecture and of the performing arts interact, and how their mutual influence contributes to the social function of art.

 

  • The performing arts and the ecological question. Far from being a place where norms about how to build, live, and “act” space are merely prescribed, architecture is a performative practice that explores new artistic and behavioural practices within and beyond its boundaries (Rufford 2019). Site-specific architectural works and site-specific performances leverage this aspect, exhibiting the continuity and mutual influence between environment, architecture, and corporeality, which leads to the realisation of a “performative ecology” of the subject (Giannetti, Stewart 2005). Thus, a peculiar declination of the relationship between art and nature and between aesthetics and ethics – which are investigated by environmental aesthetics and in particular by ecological aesthetics (Toadvine 2010) – emerges. It follows an enhancement of the dialogue between the performing arts and the principles of ecological design (Fried, May 1992) and of “deep ecology” (Næss 1973, Perruchon 2021), in the direction of a "sustainable turn” in the performing arts and the overcoming of the dualism between subject and object, nature and culture. Crucial, in this regard, is the introduction of the notion of performativity within the debate on “material agency” (Latour 1993, 1999, 2993, Cole & Bennett 2010, Brown 1998, Gell 1998), which allows it to interpret the relationship between human and non-human entities as a relationship of mutual constitution (Dalmasso 2020). We will accept papers that address the issue of performativity in the interaction between corporeality, architecture, and environment, focusing on how the performing arts lead us to rethink the relationship between art and nature, aesthetics and ethics, through their questioning of the dualistic conception of the relationship between subject and object.

 

Deadline for submission: 15 April 2023

Expected Release: July 2023

Number of characters: between 25, 000 and 40, 000.

Submissions must be sent to:

Paolo Furia (paolo.furia@unito.it)

Serena Massimo (massimoserenak@gmail.com)

 

 

 

Itinera, 25(2023)

Arti performative e architettura

A cura di Paolo Furia, Serena Massimo, Rita Messori e Federico Vercellone

 

L’indagine del rapporto tra architettura, arti performative e fruizione delle performances artistiche è particolarmente rilevante alla luce della crescente centralità conferita alla performatività delle pratiche artistiche, segnatamente alla capacità di coinvolgere in modo diretto e pervasivo gli spettatori (Dixon 2007). Cruciale, a questo proposito, è il contributo delle tecnologie digitali – “architetture liquide” (Novak 1991) – alla creazione di spazi performativi interattivi che intensificano la natura partecipativa e immersiva delle performances. La condivisione dello spazio scenico da parte di spettatori e performers è infatti indispensabile per la coproduzione di un’energia che, agendo come “forza trasformatrice”, schiude all’esperienza condivisa di scoperta di sé e dell’altro come unione di corpo e mente (Fischer-Lichte 2004).

Decisiva nel superamento della distinzione tra performers e spettatori è la messa in discussione della concezione tradizionale di spazio scenico e l’instaurazione di un rapporto inedito con l’ambiente naturale e urbano a partire dalla seconda metà del Novecento. L’individuazione, nello spazio scenico, di uno spazio “metonimico” inteso come un continuum del reale (Lehmann 1999), e l’elezione degli spazi urbani – strade, fabbriche, discariche, prigioni…– come luoghi di performances artistiche, rendono l’architettura un elemento chiave del processo fruitivo. Si tratta di superare una concezione di spazio come mero sfondo dell’azione sociale a spazio come dimensione implicata e circostanziante dell’azione (Casey 1997). “Ospiti di uno stesso spazio” (Ibid.), spettatori e performers operano una riattivazione degli spazi artistici, riattivazione che risulta a sua volta dall’influenza esercitata su di essi dagli spazi architettonici, che conferiscono la loro impronta – in forma di “corpografia” (Martínez Sánchez 2021) – a performers e spettatori inducendoli a scoprire modalità inedite di movimento, di espressione e di interazione. Naturalmente, soprattutto nel caso degli spazi abbandonati, le arti performative aprono anche alla possibilità di superare quella paralisi dell’azione sociale che contraddistingue la rovina (Simmel 1911), in qualche modo perpetuata dall’estetica del ruin porn (Siobhan 2018). La performance prelude dunque a possibili reinterpretazioni dello spazio nella direzione di un abitare possibile, che rimane la destinazione incarnata del costruire (Heidegger 1951, Ricoeur 2016).

L’esperienza corporea, affettiva e dinamica degli spazi architettonici da parte di performers e spettatori riattiva dunque la natura affettiva e performativa dell’architettura (Pallasmaa 2005), che appare essa stessa come un’arte performativa (Gomez 2013) che trae la sua vitalità dall’ospitare azioni corporee che, in modo performativo, si pongono in continuità con i processi corporei coinvolti nella costruzione degli spazi architettonici. La call si pone l’obiettivo di indagare i rapport tra architettura e arti performative sotto diversi aspetti e punti di vista. Alcuni degli argomenti che possono essere toccata sono indicate di seguito:

  • La relazione tra performance e rappresentazione. La performance è normalmente considerata una pratica estetica che coinvolge artisti e spettatori nel qui ed ora dell’evento artistico. Mentre gli approcci rappresentazionali in estetica danno maggior risalto alla vista che agli altri sensi e conducono a ipostatizzare un soggetto osservatore separato dai suoi dintorni (Berleant 1991), un più forte accento sulle pratiche porta all’esaltazione del carattere multisensoriale, incarnato e immersivo dell’esperienza estetica. Tanto i paesaggi quanto gli ambienti urbani sono considerati diversamente negli approcci rappresentazionali e non-rappresentazionali. Inoltre, negli ultimi vent’anni è possibile riscontrare un interesse crescente per approcci non-rappresentazionali tanto in geografia umana (Thrift 2007) quanto in architettura (Kozlowski 2020). Si è comunque sostenuto che rappresentazioni e pratiche non dovrebbero essere contrapposte, dal momento che le rappresentazioni dello spazio giocano un ruolo centrale nella pianificazione e nella costruzione, contribuendo a dar forma ai significati delle pratiche medesime (Lorimer 2005). I papers proposti possono indagare questioni come: in che modo il performative turn abbia condizionato tanto la teoria quanto la pratica architettonica e come elementi rappresentazionali e non-rappresentazionali siano mescolati nelle pratiche architetturali contemporanee.

 

  • Arti performative e arte pubblica. Un esempio emblematico della sinergia tra performatività dell’architettura e performatività delle arti di scena è costituito dall’impatto suscitato da performances basate sul coinvolgimento diretto del territorio e dei suoi abitanti. Nell’offrire un’esperienza collettiva partecipata, tali performances fungono da anello di congiunzione tra il privato e il pubblico – una forma di “commoning” (Chatterton 2010) – capace di trasformare lo spazio pubblico in spazio “comune” (Gurney 2015) la cui attivazione e riconnessione viene operata da parte dei fruitori stessi (Mitrache 2012). Si spiega così il coinvolgimento delle arti performative in progetti di rigenerazione urbana grazie alla loro capacità da un lato di valorizzare, veicolandola, l’azione performativa dei contesti architettonici e, dall’altro lato, di ispirare la progettazione architettonica stessa (Sieni 2021). Agendo essa stessa come un “performer” (Rufford 2019), l’architettura offre – anche secondo modalità sperimentali (Jackson 2011) – spazi che accolgono, simultaneamente, azioni performative “comunitarie” e prassi artistiche, rinsaldando il legame tra queste ultime e la vita quotidiana ed esaltandone la funzione sociale. Esempi: Fondazione Pistoletto (Biella), Centquarre#104 (Paris).

 

  • Arti performative e questione ecologica: lungi dal porsi come luogo di prescrizione di pratiche normative circa il modo di costruire, vivere, e “agire” lo spazio, l’architettura è una pratica “performativa” di esplorazione di prassi artistiche e comportamentali inedite dentro e fuori i suoi confini (Rufford 2019). Opere architettoniche site-specific e performances site-specific fanno leva su tale aspetto, mettendo in scena la continuità e l’influenza reciproca tra ambiente, architettura e corporeità, realizzando una “ecologia performata” del soggetto (Giannetti, Stewart 2005). Si assiste così a una declinazione peculiare del rapporto tra arte e natura e tra estetica ed etica sondato dall’estetica ambientale e, in particolare, dall’estetica ecologica (Toadvine 2010). Tale nesso è altresì centrale nel dialogo tra le arti performative e i princìpi dell’ecological design (Fried, May 1992) e dell’“ecologia profonda” (Næss 1973, Perruchon 2021) nella direzione di una “svolta sostenibile” delle arti performative e del superamento del dualismo tra soggetto-oggetto, natura-cultura. Cruciale, a tale proposito, è l’introduzione della nozione di performatività all’interno il dibattito circa la “material agency” (Latour 1993, 1999, 2993, Cole & Bennett 2010, Brown 1998, Gell 1998), che consente di delineare il rapporto tra enti umani ed enti non umani come un rapporto di costituzione reciproca (Dalmasso 2020).

 

Deadline for submission: 15 aprile 2023

Expected Release: luglio 2023

Number of characters: between 25, 000 and 40, 000.

Submissions must be sent to:

Paolo Furia (paolo.furia@unito.it)

Serena Massimo (massimoserenak@gmail.com)

 

 

Itinera, 25 (2023)

How to Make an Earth? Aesthetics and New Cosmologies

Edited by Pierre Montebello and Gregorio Tenti

How to make-Earth, or how to make an Earth? How is an Earth different from a world? One can begin by noticing that, in Timothy Morton’s words, «world means significantly less than it used to». Since Kant denounced the possibility of conceiving a cosmic totality as a metaphysical reverie, “world” is no longer an objectifiable entity, but rather a form of access, a transcendental domain, an ontological and/or experiential bond. And nonetheless, “world” is still what can have an end. As it revels in the eventuality of the end of its world as the end of itself, mankind turns his gaze to other worlds, far from its native planet.

Whereas a world is the extension of a (personal or collective) ego, an Earth is what grounds and at the same time unsettle a worlding operation. Some 20th-century philosophies expressed this concept through the idea of a heterogeneous physis in which the categories of Being and Becoming collapse into each other (let us think of Whitehead’s Process and Reality, Merleau-Ponty’s The Visible and the Invisible, Simondon’s Individuation in Light of Notions of Form and Information). A neo-cosmological sensibility is taking hold in newer debates with different speculative outcomes, and the need of conceiving a cosmicity which does not overlap with the notion of world seems increasingly urgent.

In the field of aesthetics, the concept of Earth raises numerous and topical questions. The problems revolving around the idea of Earth-shaping, for instance, evoke a whole new view on making in general. How is it possible to transform what, by definition, transforms us? How can an Earth be shaped, or even built from scratch? And can an Earth be represented, or can it only be narrated? Can we still talk of Earth-narratives? The epoch in which symbolic and geologic doing seem irrevocably intertwined is the same epoch in which the human being has gained access, for the first time in its history, to a photographic depiction of its own planet. It is also a time that produces dramatically problematic narrations about itself and the future of the Earth we live with.

 

This issue of Itinera welcomes articles addressing the philosophical notion of Earth, with special regard to its aesthetic implications. Some of the topics that may be discussed are:

 

- Aesthetics and phenomenological cosmologies (Heidegger, Minkowski, Tymieniecka, Barbaras…)

- Aesthetics and living territories

- Cosmomorphic aesthetics and geoaesthetics

- Aesthetics and geophilosophy

- Cosmopoiesis and techno-ecological praxis (Sloterdijk, Haraway, Yuk Hui…)

- Cosmopoiesis in anthropology (Viveiros de Castro, Latour, Descola…)

- Artistic cosmological practices, representations of the Earth

- Post-world aesthetics

Deadline for submission: April 15th, 2023

Expected Release: July 2023

Papers can be written in English, Italian and French.

Submissions must be sent to: grgr.tenti@gmail.com
 
 

 

 

Itinera, 25 (2023)

Comment faire une Terre ? Esthétique et nouvelles cosmologies

Sous la direction de Pierre Montebello et Gregorio Tenti

 

Comment faire-Terre, ou comment faire une Terre ? En quoi une Terre est-elle différente d’un monde ? On peut commencer par noter qu’aujourd’hui, pour le dire avec Timothy Morton, « le terme monde signifie beaucoup moins qu’auparavant ». Dès que Kant a dénoncé la possibilité de concevoir une totalité cosmique en tant que rêve métaphysique, « monde » n’est plus une entité objectivable, mais plutôt une forme d’accès, un domaine transcendantal, un lien ontologique et/ou expérientiel. Et pourtant, « monde » est encore ce qui peut avoir une fin. Lorsqu’elle considère l’éventualité de la fin de son propre monde comme fin de soi, l’humanité tourne son regard vers autres mondes, loin de sa planète d’origine.

Alors qu’un monde coïncide avec l’extension d’un ego (personnel ou collectif), une Terre fonde et à la fois appelle une opération différente. Certaines philosophies du XXème siècle ont parlé d’une physis hétérogène dans laquelle les catégories d’être et devenir se mêlent (il suffit de penser a Procès et réalité de Whitehead, a Le Visible et l’invisible de Merleau-Ponty, l’Individuation à la lumière de notions de forme et d’information de Simondon). Une sensibilité néo-cosmologique émerge dans les débats les plus récents avec des résultats différents : l’exigence de penser une forme de cosmicité qui ne se superpose pas à la notion de monde représente une urgence croissante.

Dans le domaine esthétique, le concept de Terre soulève nombreuses et importantes questionnes. Les problèmes qui tournent autour de l’idée de « faire-Terre », par exemple, évoquent un nouveau paradigme du faire en général. Comment est-il possible de transformer ce que, par définition, nous transforme ? Comment peut la Terre être formée, ou même bâtie ex novo ? Et encore : peut la Terre peut-elle être représentée, ou peut-elle seulement être narrée ? Peut-on parler encore de narrations de la Terre ? L’époque dans laquelle l’agir symbolique et l’agir géologique semblent irrévocablement imbriqués est en fait l’époque dans laquelle l’être humain a accès, pour la première fois dans son histoire, à une représentation photographique de sa planète ; un temps qui produit des narrations dramatiquement problématiques par rapport à soi-même et au futur de la Terre avec laquelle nous vivons.

 

Pour ce numéro de Itinera on prendra en considération des articles autour de la notion philosophique de Terre, particulièrement dans ses implications esthétiques. Des sujets qui pourraient être adressés sont :

 

- Esthétique et cosmologies phénoménologiques (Heidegger, Minkowski, Tymieniecka, Barbaras...)

- Esthétique et territoires vivantes

- Esthétique cosmomorphe et geoesthétique

- Esthétique et geophilosophie

- Cosmopoièse et praxis techno-écologiques (Sloterdijk, Haraway, Yuk Hui...)

- Cosmopoièse dans l’anthropologie (Viveiros de Castro, Latour, Descola...)

- Pratiques artistiques cosmologiques, représentations de la Terre

- Esthétiques du post-monde

Deadline for submission: April 15th, 2023

Expected Release: July 2023

Les articles peuvent être rédigés en anglais, italien et français.
Les propositions seront à envoyer à : grgr.tenti@gmail.com  
 

 

Itinera, 25 (2023)

Come fare una Terra? Estetica e nuove cosmologie

A cura di Pierre Montebello e Gregorio Tenti

Come fare-Terra, o come fare una Terra? In che cosa una Terra è diversa da un mondo? Si può cominciare notando che oggi, come scrive Timothy Morton, «il termine mondo ha un significato molto minore che in passato». Da quando Kant denunciò come fantasia metafisica la possibilità di concepire una totalità cosmica, “mondo” non è più un’entità oggettivabile, ma piuttosto una forma di accesso, un dominio trascendentale, un legame ontologico e/o esperienziale. E nonostante questo, “mondo” è ancora ciò che può avere una fine. Mentre considera l’eventualità della fine del proprio mondo come fine di sé, l’umanità volge lo sguardo verso altri mondi lontani dal suo pianeta natio.

Laddove un mondo è l’estensione di un ego (personale o collettivo), una Terra è ciò che fonda e insieme inquieta un’operazione di mondeggiamento. Alcune filosofie del XX secolo hanno espresso questo concetto nell’idea di una physis eterogenea in cui le categorie di essere e divenire collassano l’una sull’altra (si pensi al Whitehead di Processo e realtà, al Merleau-Ponty de Il visibile e l’invisibile, al Simondon dell’Individuazione alla luce delle nozioni di forma e informazione). Una sensibilità neo-cosmologica sta prendendo piede nei dibattiti più recenti con esiti speculativi differenti, e l’esigenza di pensare una forma di cosmicità non sovrapposta alla nozione di mondo sembra affacciarsi con urgenza crescente.

In ambito estetico, il concetto di Terra solleva numerosi e importanti questioni. I problemi che girano attorno all’idea di “fare-Terra”, per esempio, evocano un nuovo paradigma del fare in generale. Come è possibile trasformare ciò che, per definizione, ci trasforma? Come può una Terra essere formata, o addirittura costruita ex novo? E ancora: può una Terra essere rappresentata, o può solo essere narrata? È ancora possibile parlare di narrazioni della Terra? L’epoca in cui l’agire simbolico e quello geologico sembrano irrevocabilmente intrecciati è difatti anche l’epoca in cui l’essere umano ha accesso, per la prima volta nella sua storia, a una rappresentazione fotografica del suo pianeta; un’epoca che produce narrazioni drammaticamente problematiche riguardo a sé stessa e al futuro della Terra con cui viviamo.

 

Questo numero di Itinera accoglie articoli dedicati alla nozione filosofica di Terra, con particolare attenzione per le sue implicazioni estetiche. Alcuni argomenti che possono essere trattati sono:

 

- Estetica e cosmologie fenomenologiche (Heidegger, Minkowski, Tymieniecka, Barbaras...)

- Estetica e territori viventi

- Estetica cosmomorfa e geoestetica

- Estetica e geofilosofia

- Cosmopoiesi e prassi tecno-ecologiche (Sloterdijk, Haraway, Yuk Hui...)

- Cosmopoiesi in antropologia (Viveiros de Castro, Latour, Descola...)

- Pratiche artistiche cosmologiche, rappresentazioni della Terra

- Estetiche del post-mondo

Deadline for submission: April 15th, 2023

Expected Release: July 2023

Gli articoli possono essere scritti in inglese, italiano e francese.
Le proposte devono essere inviate a: grgr.tenti@gmail.com

 

 

Itinera, 24 (2022)

The immortal Fascination of the Monster. Monstrous Births and human Phenomena between Normality and Deviation.

Edited by Marina Mascherini and Bruno Accarino 

Today wonders and prodigies are on the agenda and populate literature, cinema, art, philosophy. A new curiosity about deviance and normality has certainly contributed, and still contributes, to the fascination ascribable to the extraordinary and the marginal. Once the ideals of order and rationality entered deeply into crisis, wonder and the marvelous have assumed an unimaginable importance, especially in intellectual circles.

Why are all kinds of wonders and prodigies arousing so much interest?

The reason is that both contradict and destabilize an already variable, inconstant and heterogeneous nature. Monstrous births are one of the sensational events that cause wonder and astonishment and which we fully consider prodigies. In the literature on monsters and portents there have been some technical and conceptual difficulties in defining the scope of the subjects to be analysed. It is therefore important to clearly specify the type of phenomena that we intend to discuss: natural alterations and anomalies, deviations from the norm and abnormalities. We define the anomaly, that which is off the track, irregular, a derailment of development that generates nothing but change.

The human monster, the deformed, the monstrous births, the freaks; embryos whose development has been interrupted at a certain level and which Deleuze called bizarre and irregular, force us to deal with a second nature in the making.

It is by looking at the monster that man recognizes himself and acquires self-awareness, it is by observing this pole of attraction and repulsion at the same time that man reconstructs his own image.

The visual representation of the monstrosity, its aesthetic form, is that of the grotesque, the excessive, the caricature: exaggerated figures and shapes in motion that break the monotony by virtue of unexpected combinations. Between the coexistence of these contrasts and the reconstruction of a lost unity, the monster is manifestly such and the display of this monstrousness provokes and is present in all cultures. The monsters to be found in the Natural History Cabinets are not easily classifiable. They are as likely to be found in Curiosity cabinets as in circuses or in laboratories and anatomical tables.

These prodigies exhibit a high form of hybridization in which science and entertainment merge.

The analysis of the present perception of the monster is aimed at its ambiguity, presenting itself as a union of contrasting features that stand out on a horizon that leads back to otherness and difference.

Our fascination with freaks gives rises to confusion. These monsters whose fascinating and attractive characters inevitably intertwine with a contrasting shape, appear as horrible as they are attractive and bewitching.

Some examples of topics that may be addressed are:

  • The marvellous and the prodigious between the 16th and 17th centuries.
  • Monstrous births from the Middle Ages to the Enlightenment.
  • Cabinets of curiosities, monstrous collections and uncanny sentiment.
  • Studies on monsters between the 16th and 17th centuries in France and England.
  • Naturalists, zoologists and anatomists in Europe between the 18th and 19th centuries.
  • The Freaks: between science and entertainment.
  • The anomaly and the deformed in art (painting, sculpture, architecture, theater, music)
  • The monster in literature and/or cinema.
  • The normal and the pathological: deviations from the norm.

The support of iconographic material combined with sources and captions is desirable, useful for grasping the object of analysis with a certain degree of clarity and concreteness.

Paper can be written in Italian, English or French 

Deadline for submission: 15th April 2023

Expected Release: July 2023

Editors:

Marina Mascherini (marina.mascherini@unifi.it)

Bruno Accarino (bruno.accarino@unifi.it)

 

 

 

 

 

Itinera, 23 (2022)

Aesthetics, Technique and Emotion

Edited by Alice Barale, Claudio Rozzoni

In June 2020, a Summer School was organized to discuss the topics of aesthetics, technique and emotion. The School was led by the University of Milan in collaboration with the European Seminar of Aesthetics at the Lake Como School of Advanced Studies (https://aeat.lakecomoschool.org/). This issue of Itinera aims to develop this discussion further.

What is aesthetics, and what value can this question have today? Indeed, many changes are occurring nowadays in our aesthetic perception of the world. Against this backdrop, the boundaries of arts are also becoming more and more difficult to determine – considering, for example, the new challenges posed by art created by (or through) artificial intelligence, or the new productive possibilities offered by virtual reality. Moreover, aesthetic/artistic value is increasingly attributed to many aspects of our everyday life, like the images that we exchange daily via mobile phones and websites. In this context, the issue also arises regarding the nature of emotions raised by these new types of art: are they of the same type as those of real life, or are they different in some way?

In the face of these innovations, what tools for thinking can be provided by aesthetics, a discipline that was born in the eighteenth century, in a necessarily very different cultural environment? Moreover, what role can categories such as beauty, ugliness, sublime, kitsch, or concepts such as genius, creation and taste play today? How is it possible to rethink our idea of the art and the artist, or the relationship between the artists and the techniques used in their works?

Topics include but are not limited to:

  • Art and performativity in virtual environments
  • Art, creation and artificial intelligence
  • Contemporary Art, Morality and Politics
  • Relationships between philosophy and the different artforms
  • Different approaches to the study of emotions elicited by art, particularly with respect to interdisciplinary approaches (both continental and analytic philosophy, psychology, cognitive sciences and neurosciences).

Deadline for submission: April 15th, 2022

Expected Release: July 2022

Editors: Alice Barale, Claudio Rozzoni

 

 

 

 

 

Itinera, 23 (2022)

Colour. Photography, Image, Reality

Edited by Andrea Mecacci, Gabriele Gambaro, Marcello Sessa, Linda Bertelli

The use of colour in photographic and cinematographic image-making has been largely discussed over the 20th century. Philosophers, art theorists, and media researchers have contributed to broaden the debate on the specific tense between realty and fiction, which has always characterized images.

The all-pervading digital technologies, the ensuing proliferation of images, and the ever increasing prompt access to techniques of photographic manipulation, have originated new attitudes and practices linked to the creation of images, to their use and fruition. Such innovations, deeply innervated in the tissue of our lives (both individual and social), allow the discussion on the status of the image – and not just the photographic one – to unfold the contemporary dimension and renew the actual analysis of the relationship between image and reality. Image can be considered as a factual, objective evidence of the external world as well as a subjective re-representation of it.

Colour reflects this “fluid” nature of the image today: it points out and questions at the same time every kind of identity. It can be the opportunity to examine every pattern of recognition (that can be ours or of others, human or non-human). Thus, the reflection on images encounters the philosophical debate on colour, the latest seen as reality or as subjective illusion. Additionally, the investigation on colour itself can contribute to the discussion on the relationship between image and reality.

Can the choice of a specific colour define the emotional tone of an image? In which ways can chromatic changes redefine experience and perception? Can the complexity of digital information flows be reduced by aesthetic quality of colours? Finally, which is the role of the sensible capacity of colour in making sense of a reality ever more conveyed by images?

A group of scholars tried to respond to these questions at the webinar “Photography, Reality, Colour” (University of Milan, 19th November 2020). The issue n. 23 of Itinera – concerning “Colour. Photograhy, Image, Reality” – aims to follow the same path with further steps. Namely, with additional contributions that study the image/reality dialectic moving from colour.

We are asking you to address the issue with multidisciplinary research tools (e.g.: art history, art criticism, theory of art, theory of image, semiotics, visual and media studies, digital humanities), with consideration of the starting and fundamental aesthetic framework, represented here by the reflection on colour.

Among the suggested topics of research:

  • Colour as writing
  • Colour in the shift from analogic to digital image
  • The use of the sensible capacity of colour in Data Visualization
  • Colour and socio-cultural re-narrations

Articles written in English, French and Italian are welcomed. Papers can be long from 25.000 to 40.000 characters (final bibliography excluded), and must be written in accordance with Itinera’s editorial standards: https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/itinera/norme

Deadline for submissions: 15th February 2022

Expected release: July 2022

Submission must be sent via e-mail to the editors not later than 15th February 2022:

Andrea Mecacci (andrea.mecacci@unifi.it)

Gabriele Gambaro (gabrielegambaro@gmail.com)

Marcello Sessa (marcello.sessa@phd.unipi.it)

Linda Bertelli  (linda.bertelli@imtlucca.it)

 

Itinera, 23 (2022)

Colore. Fotografia, Immagine, Realtà

A cura di Andrea Mecacci, Gabriele Gambaro, Marcello Sessa, Linda Bertelli

L’utilizzo del colore nelle immagini fotografiche e cinematografiche è stato ampiamente dibattuto nel corso del Novecento. Gli spunti offerti da filosofi, teorici dell’arte e studiosi dei media hanno contribuito all’ampliamento della discussione sulla particolare tensione tra realtà e finzione che da sempre attraversa l’immagine.

La pervasività delle tecnologie digitali, la proliferazione di immagini che ne deriva e l’accesso sempre più immediato a tecniche di manipolazione fotografica, hanno sviluppato nuove sensibilità e pratiche associate alla fruizione, all’uso e alla creazione di immagini. A fronte di queste innovazioni innervate nei tessuti delle nostre vite individuali e sociali, il dibattito sullo statuto dell’immagine – fotografica e non solo – si apre a una dimensione contemporanea in grado di offrire una riflessione attuale sul rapporto tra realtà e immagine, intesa ora come testimonianza oggettiva del mondo esterno e ora come sua ri-rappresentazione soggettiva.

Il colore riflette questo carattere “fluido”, facendo emergere e mettendo in causa al tempo stesso ogni identità. Il colore è qui più che mai possibilità di forma e interrogazione sui criteri di ogni riconoscimento (nostro e altrui, umano e non-umano). La riflessione sull’immagine incontra così il dibattito filosofico sul colore, considerato ora come realtà e ora come illusione soggettiva. E a sua volta, l’indagine sul colore sembra poter contribuire alla discussione sul rapporto tra realtà e immagine.

La scelta di un determinato colore può determinare la tonalità emotiva di un’immagine? In che modo le modificazioni cromatiche possono ridefinire un’esperienza e la sua stessa percezione? La complessità dei flussi informativi digitali può essere ridotta attraverso le qualità estetiche dei colori? Infine, quale ruolo assume l’offerta sensibile del colore nel dare senso a una realtà sempre più veicolata da immagini?

A queste domande si è provato a rispondere in un webinar organizzato dall’Università degli Studi di Milano il 19 novembre 2020, significativamente intitolato “Fotografia, realtà, colore”. Il numero 23 di Itinera – dedicato a “Colore. Fotografia, immagine, realtà” – vorrebbe proseguire questo cammino e arricchirlo di ulteriori contributi, che analizzino il rapporto tra immagine e realtà con un approccio teorico che muova proprio dal dato cromatico.

Si invita dunque ad accostare il problema con strumenti di ricerca multidisciplinari (per esempio: storia, critica e teoria dell’arte, teoria dell’immagine, semiotica, cultura visuale, digital humanities) senza dimenticare la cornice estetologica di base, qui incarnata dalla riflessione sul colore, per interrogarsi sul ruolo del colore nelle trasformazioni che investono lo statuto dell’immagine e, più specificatamente, della relazione di quest’ultima con la realtà.

Tra i possibili argomenti da affrontare, solo a titolo di esempio:

  • Il colore come scrittura
  • Il colore nel passaggio da immagine analogica a digitale
  • L’utilizzo delle qualità estetiche dei colori nella Data Visualization
  • Il colore e ri-narrazioni socioculturali

Si accettano articoli in inglese, francese e italiano. Ciascun contributo dovrà essere compreso tra i 25.000 e i 40.000 caratteri (bibliografia finale esclusa), e dovrà rigorosamente attenersi alle norme redazionali di Itinera, consultabili sul sito della rivista al seguente link:

https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/itinera/norme

Deadline for submissions: 15 febbraio 2022

Expected release: luglio 2022

I saggi vanno inviati entro il 15 febbraio 2022 agli indirizzi e-mail dei curatori:

Andrea Mecacci (andrea.mecacci@unifi.it)

Gabriele Gambaro (gabrielegambaro@gmail.com)

Marcello Sessa (marcello.sessa@phd.unipi.it)

Linda Bertelli  (linda.bertelli@imtlucca.it)

Gli articoli selezionati saranno poi sottoposti a un processo di double blind peer review.

 

Itinera, 22 (2021)

Diderot: Space and Movement

Edited by Valentina Sperotto

 

Newton and modern science, especially Mathematics and Physics, have completely changed the concepts of space and movement. Unlike other thinkers of that century, among whom Immanuel Kant stands for his remarkable thought, the new concepts of space and movement don’t seem to have influenced Diderot’s thinking effectively.

In his analysis about ontological and representational elaboration of these concepts in Diderot’s works, François Pépin has pointed out that the philosopher didn’t reject the universal and abstract conception of space claimed by mechanism and Newtonianism. Space wasn’t a central notion in Diderot’s materialistic philosophy. In fact, in his works there is an elaboration of that concept which can be defined as aside. Space is not a neutral physic space but it is more similar to something dynamic, concrete and plural.

Jean Starobinski has shown that, in aesthetic field, XVIIIth century represents a moment of overthrowing the hierarchical organization of space, which was a typical and central perspective of Art in the previous centuries. Multiplication of points of view and variation of the movement of the scene are emblematic of this period, also on a symbolic level. In Diderot’s considerations upon Arts there are elements close to that conception of space and movement.

Moreover, in his Salons Diderot seems to consider paintings as dynamic and crossing spaces experienced through description and imagination. Many questions arise connected to this statement: in what way the rhetoric figure of ekphrasis used by Diderot contributes to this effect? How does the philosopher conceive space in paintings? And in sculpture? What is the relation between space and movement in visual Arts? Just to list a few examples.

The reflection about space and movement does not only concern visual Arts, it comes to light even in the pages dedicated to dramatic Art and in literary works.

It is known that Diderot’s reflection about theatre represents a fundamental contribution for the innovation of the scene and of the genres, particularly with the introduction of the new bourgeois’ drama. There are some interesting philosophical elements about space and movement’s conception even in this field. For example, the conception of the theatrical scene as a succession of pictures or the concept of movement as gesture and pantomime. It can be considered also the decisive debate of that time about the role of theatre in society and the different idea of the theatrical space conceived by Diderot and Rousseau.

Finally, space is a crucial element also in novels and tales where it is integral part of the interactions between characters. Especially in Jacques le fataliste et son maître, the characters are constantly moving and this aspect can be seen through a philosophical point of view. How has Diderot envisaged the places that the protagonist passes through or stays in? What is the relation between characters and places? How space and movement are represented in others novels and tales? The answers to these questions bring out new aspects that have not been touched by literary critics yet.

Topics include but are not limited to:

 

- The concept of space in Diderot’s works of aesthetics (painting, sculpture, architecture, theatre, literature, music);

- The concept of movement in Diderot’s works of aesthetics (painting, sculpture, architecture, theatre, literature, music).

- The relation between space and movement in Diderot’s works of aesthetics (painting, sculpture, architecture, theatre, literature, music).

- The comparison between Diderot’s concepts of space and movement in aesthetics and other contemporary authors.

 

Deadline for submission: 15th July 2021

Expected Release: December 2021

Editor: Valentina Sperotto (sperottovalentina@gmail.com)

Itinera, 21 (2021)

Is the sublime now?

The sublime is a concept that has never ceased to attract and to fascinate scholars. In its classical formulation, it dates back to the eighteenth century, but some of the issues that characterize its origin – such as the border between representation and the unrepresentable, or between form and formless, pleasure and terror – return strongly in contemporary thinking. In this regard, opinions are divided. Is the sublime an already outdated notion that can only be discussed from a historical point of view? Or does it also contain important elements for the current philosophical debate? Moreover, have the transformations that the sublime has undergone in the contemporary world substantially distorted it, or have they instead brought to light some new possible implications of this concept? This issue of "Itinera" is dedicated to these and other similar questions, starting from the traditional definitions of the sublime between the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, until its most recent interpretations. Some examples of topics that may be addressed are:

  • The traditional definitions of the sublime and their implications for the current philosophical
    debate
  • The history of the reception (or less favourable fortunes) of the sublime
  • The sublime in the arts, from the eighteenth century to today
  • The sublime and the relationship between man and nature
  • The possible contemporary interpretations of the sublime
  • The sublime and color
  • The sublime and neuroscience
  • The sublime and wonder: psychological and pedagogical approach
  • The sublime and awe: complex experiences and transformation in psychology

Papers can be written in Italian, English, Spanish or French

Deadline for submission: 30th April 2021

Expected Release: July 2021

Editors:
Alice Barale (alice.barale@unifi.it)
Alice Chirico (alice.chirico@unicatt.it)
Claudio Rozzoni (claudio.rozzoni@gmail.com)