Lotz's article 13.1

Dublin Core

Title

Lotz's article 13.1

Article Item Type Metadata

Author

Christian Lotz

Title

Representation or Sensation?: A Critique of Deleuze’s Philosophy of Painting

Abstract

In this paper, I shall present an argument against Deleuze’s philosophy of painting. Deleuze’s main thesis in Logic of Sensation is twofold: [1] he claims that painting is based on a non-representational level; and [2] he claims that this level comes out of the materiality of painting. I shall claim that Deleuze’s theses should be rejected for the following reasons: first, the difference between non-intentional life and the representational world is too strict. I submit that the nonintentional relation that painting opens up is itself part of andemerges out of the representational force of painting. If this would not be the case, then the criterion for differentiating between paintings and other objects cannot be developed. Indeed, Deleuze fails to give us a criterion. Second, Deleuze’s way of dealing with materiality in painting remains unsatisfactory insofar as he is unable to take into account how materiality is charged with an “attitude toward the world.” In sum, materiality can only be painting’s materiality if we understand it as being formed and disclosed in representation.

Volume

13.1 (Spring/Printemps 2009)

Pages

59-72

Files

Collection

Citation

“Lotz's article 13.1,” Symposium, accessed April 27, 2024, http://www.artsrn.ualberta.ca/symposium/items/show/55.

Document Viewer