Dear Aaconers,
I agree with Vincent that we need a more comprehensive approach concerning the relation between art(ists) and management/organisation (practice). Like Daved and John, I also would like to read more about his “Portrait of the Manager as an Artist?”
Furthermore, I would like to introduce Paul Jeffcutt to our community. He is the founding Director of the the interdisciplinary Centre for Creative Industry http://www.creative.qub.ac.uk/ at Belfast University and co-leader of the UK Research Seminar Network on Cultural and Creative Industries sponsored by the ESRC and AHRB.
He has written articles related to our field of interest:
His Contact Details:
Email: [log in to unmask]
Tel: +44 (0)28 9097 3112
Please welcome him with me to our forum!
Wendelin
Dr. W. Küpers
Lehrstuhl für Betriebswirtschaftslehre,
insbesondere Personalführung und Organisation
Fernuniversität in
Tel.: + 49 (0)2331/987-4905
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von:
Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] Im Auftrag von John Cimino
Gesendet: Dienstag,
13. März 2007 14:09
An: [log in to unmask]
Betreff: Re: Art and
Management (the artefacts or the methods)
Vincent,
Like Daved, I am much interested in your paper "Portrait of the Manager..." and love to gain access to a copy. Your notes touched several chords for me:
(i) art as "a philosophy, an history, methods to understand the meaning of works in their context, methods to understand why this works..." -- I am teaching a group of faculty fellows about the mind processes of the arts applied across many academic and professional disciplines and the methods and modes of arts-based understanding are simultaneously key and very slippery. (ii) the evidential paradigm ..."you accept it as it is and observe to what extend it explains the world (psychoanalysis being a good example of what has been described by Ginzburg as the Evidential Paradigm) -- for me this resembles the operation work of metaphors, but on a much larger scale, based as they are on an implied inductive process which seeks out satisfying "evidence" of an underlying connection between "a" and "b". (iii) your idea that "Decisions are linked together by their context, their “authors”, they are series such as works of art." and will look to your paper for more on this; and (iv) most of all, your notion of "works of art as solutions" and their relationship to decision trees and implied problems, ambiguities and paradozes to be illuminated, if not solved.
Would love to hear more from you whenever you have a moment. I am more of a practitioner than a scholar and so tend see things often in terms of what my colleagues and I have been experimenting with in the field these last 30 years. Likewise, my background is initially from the sciences and I came to the arts always intrigued by the possibilities of building bridges across the famous divide. Hoping to hear more from you.
John
John J. Cimino, Jr.
President
& CEO
Creative Leaps International
The Learning Arts
Icarus
Musicworks
Associated Solo Artists, Inc.
88
Hardscrabble Road
Chester, NY 10918
845-469-7254 0ffice
845-216-0607 Cell
In our world, the arts are no
longer some parallel experience
you have along the way, but rather a
powerful source of insight and transformation
feeding directly into the
thinking, feeling and acting of daily life
—full of possibility, truth and
optimism. John Cimino
----- Original Message -----
From: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">degot_vincent
To: [log in to unmask] href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2007 10:20 AM
Subject: Art and Management (the artefacts or the methods)
I am stricken in all the debates as an (un) active member of AACORN I follow, like a sort of tennis match by the conception which implicitly reduces art to works, as if management was only decisions. May be my point of view is biased by the fact that I have a rather classical - and to some extend documented - knowledge of classical art rather than contemporary productions. But I will not extend on my position because what I wand to say is not linked to a point of view. Let say in short that a broader view help to identify certain gaps.
To return to my starting point, Art is much more than a collection of productions : it is a philosophy, an history, methods to understand the meaning of works in their context, methods to understand why this works has been produces in such a way because of the available techniques (the relation between the chemistry of colours and the “innovation” of Tintoretto, the relation between the progress of metallurgy and the apparition of the ronde-bosses in the 13th century the Pisanos in Sienna), methods to understand the secret meaning of the works like (for instance) what Freud propose in his “essays of Applied Psychoanalysis”, Iconography, the links between texts and visual production (from Warburg to Panofsky), and so on. And all this constellation of disciplines related to art, are themselves using various field of Science : psychology, history, chemistry.
I have not yet read in those excited exchange between Accorn members any reflection on how the methods developed and mobilized to study art could be transferred, adapted, to study this recent productions (comparatively to art) that are economic decisions. (I hate to quote myself, but there is a modest try in a paper published a long time ago in various languages and journals entitled “Portrait of the Manager as an Artist”). Decisions are linked together by their context, their “authors”, they are series such as works of art. They can be classified according to school of thoughts, (may be alike “scuola” in. painting).
Ok that’s all, I am sorry if I am not clear enough, sorry for my French.
I am presently working (not professionally, as a dilettante) on a “theory” of art considering that a work of art is a solution, perhaps the only solution if you take into account all the constraint (technical, of style, of his personal history, of the patrons, of the location, etc.) that the author could produce. If you demonstrate or accept this hypothesis studying a work id reconstructions the tree of choices that – consciously or not – the author has made. I think that such a “theory” could have some resonance in management study. I this topic appeals to some of the scholars on the AACORN “network” let me know.
The problem with theories on art – and probably be other domains -, nowadays, is that at the difference with those enounced by Kant or Croce, is that their authors will be challenged to validate them, meaning in the modern way to gather the material to validate them. Did you noticed any reference to a precise work of art in Kant’s Critique of Judgment.
But a theory is two sided object. Either you collect and classify and analyse material to substantiate then (the scientific way) or you accept it as it is and observe to what extend it explains the world (psychoanalysis being a good example of what has been described by Ginzburg as the Evidential Paradigm).
The reference to Kant reminds me of another research project connected to art and aesthetic that I would like to tackle if they were some scholar (that I am not) interested to invest some time in digging with me. Is it possible to reconstruct the corpus of works of art effectively known (in the sense of a physical encounter) by some of the authors (philosophers like Kant or Nietzsche, man of letters like Flaubert or James) who have proficiently written on art. To deal with such a research one has to establish first the travels those authors have done which could have put them in contact with works , but also, if we are dealing with authors in the 18th or 19th century, to locate where were these works, belonging to whom, visible or not.
OK now I am done
Vincent Dégot (Ecole Polytechnique, Paris)