Teaching Contigencies: Deleuze, Creativity Discourses and Art

Teaching Contigencies: Deleuze, Creativity Discourses and Art

Soodabeh Salehi

Language: English

Pages: 333

ISBN: 2:00145588

Format: PDF / Kindle (mobi) / ePub

This dissertation, flying between aesthetics, visual arts, and political/cultural/historical
issues, traverses lines of stratification, and (de/re)territorialization to examine
uncertainties in making and teaching art. Inkeeping with a conviction that nothing is
unitary, that everything is always connected to countless others, Deleuze and Guattari’s
metaphor of rhizome is the central organizing element in my work. My research
questions what is meant by creativity, whether assumed to be a gift, talent, or innate
quality, and what is meant by teaching art inuniversity, which assumes creativity can be
organized and developed.
Differing discourses of creativity exhibit a general continuityof agreement that creation
takes place within chaos, and forms where chaos and order meet each other. I posit that
contemporary discourses of creativity hegemonically reinforce capitalism as a system of
nomadic power and of constant de/reterritorialization. All, in a capitalist system, is linked
to the construction of the urge to consume,and therefore the acceleration of capitalism
necessitates an increase in the rate at which we manufacture venues for consumption,
even in such innovative ways as by making creativity itself a consumable package. How
do we resist this?
From a Deleuzian point of view, creation is a becoming event, as destructive as
productive. Creativity, which is about freedom, occurs on a plane of immanence which
sifts chaos and multiplicity together to breaklines. Teaching, however, is on a “plane of
organization” where rigid and dichotomous segmentarities of personal and social life
operate. I suggest that artistic knowledge canbe theorized and taught, in the Schönian
sense, but creativity, a matter of “lines of flight,” is fundamentallyunrelated to artistic
knowledge. I argue that what canbe taught is technique, theory, and the material
language of media, and that these should be taught as explicit professional objectives, not
as “creativity.” We canteach the value of breaking away from the false seriousness of
creativity, with reference to Dada. We can teach the enjoyment of chaos and the
confrontation of it. We can teach resistance. We can teach a love of complexities. We can
teach play.

Lessons on the Analytic of the Sublime (Meridian: Crossing Aesthetics)

Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art: An Introduction (2nd Edition) (Elements of Philosophy)

Soul and Form (Columbia Themes in Philosophy, Social Criticism, and the Arts)

Contemporary Chinese Aesthetics


















attribute the ambiguity of the term “post-modern” to its application in differing fields. They contend that all of these “post” terms function as sequential markers, designating that which follows and comes after the modern. The discourse of post-modern thus involves periodizing terms which describe a set of key changes in history, society, culture, and thought. The confusion involved in the discourse of the post-modern results from its usage in different fields and disciplines and the fact that

the tools to climb that wall. (Creativity Explosion, n.d. ¶ 2) It seems the new ethos for success is built by a package of /for creativity, one full of formulas and techniques -- a capsulate of handy tools and techniques offered to increase creativity. It is simple. In order to survive in the contemporary complex world with its globalized, hypercompetitive, post-network economy we just need to order the package, apply the techniques and become creative and productive. Such prescriptions, typical

the same place” (Schuldberg, 1999, p. 263). Hence, non-repeating periodicities and irregular patterns of movement are referred to as strange attractor states. A strange attractor “is a state or pattern of activity toward which a system tends to slide of its own accord” (Combs, 1995, p. 28). As Peat (1991) elaborates, a non-linear system constantly changes from one attractor state to another over time. This transition of chaotic flux may completely reorganize the whole system in an unpredictable

he 189 repeated the test two or three times (he does in 3 Standards Stoppages). In fact, the arrangement defined and set by Duchamp is technically deterministic. He limits the elements and subsequently limits the range of possible outcomes. But the actual implementation is based on the random. Duchamp does not direct the result to a particular end. Duchamp suggests a paradox in his work, the contradiction between intelligence and chance, order and possibility, which may be one of the reasons

prohibited. He identifies three ways of controlling discourse: in terms of objects (what is spoken of), ritual (where and how one speaks), and the privileged or exclusive right to speak of certain subjects (who speaks). In fact, these three types of prohibition determine who can utter truth, how and under which conditions, and from which position. He writes, In a society such as our own we all know the rules of exclusion. The most obvious and familiar of these concerns what is prohibited. We know

Download sample