Franz Boas and the Primacy of Form
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4158813 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Bence Nanay (0000-0002-2835-6530, University of Antwerp, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 64 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 381-395 |
| Publication date | 2024-08-13 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The British Journal of Aesthetics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0007-0904 • E-ISSN: 1468-2842 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/aesthj/ayad029 |
| OpenAlex | W4391897973 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
| References cited | 10 |
There is systematic epistemic asymmetry between different centers of art production: we know far more about some (e.g. fifteenth-century Italian paintings) than about others (e.g. fifteenth-century Inca textiles). As long as we are focusing on the social context of the artworks or the artist's intention, this epistemic asymmetry remains, given that we have vastly more information about the social context of the artworks or the artist's intention when it comes to 'Western' art-again, because of the historically contingent differences in record-keeping and the survival rate of such records. If we want to overcome the epistemic asymmetry between 'Western' and 'Non-Western' art, we need to look elsewhere. I will argue, using Franz Boas's work, that we should look for formal features. In order to avoid the epistemic asymmetry that follows from the historically contingent fact that we have more information about some cultures than about others, we need to start our analysis with formal categories
Aesthetics · Archaeology · Art · Art history · Context (archaeology · Epistemology · Fifteenth · Order (exchange · Painting · Sociology · Aesthetic Perception and Analysis · Classics · History · Philosophy
| Citations per year | 1.5 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2024 - 2025 (2) |
| Highly cited | No |