In the very origins of formalism as a theory of arts, and in the context of the debate concerning a certain determinist formulation of “materialism” (that of G. Semper), an antinomy emerges between the perceptual or phenomenic dimension of art and its physical- material dimension. Both dimensions seem equally necessary in order to specify the peculiar condition of art, which for formalism entails the difference between the diverse artistic practices. This antinomy is linked to the formalist ambition of establishing the foundations for the autonomy of the arts by specifying them through a double principle: first, an “aesthetic” principle, which emphasizes the specificity of the arts? different “sensuous spheres”, and secondly, a “poietic” principle, which emphasizes the plurality of the technical processes of the different arts. Eduard Hanslick (a foundational author of formalism, from the middle of the 19th century) formulated this problematic for the art of music in terms of the “elementary materials of music”. After exploring his formulation, we will quickly point to some parallelisms with formalist authors of roughly the same period such as Konrad Fiedler and Alois Riegl. We will finish by indicating how, in the future evolution of formalism as “modernism”, i.e., as the main discourse about modern art, the viewpoint of the act of artistic creation would be finally displaced by that of reception and the spectator as vantage point for treating this issue of the “materiality” of art.

Abstract

In the very origins of formalism as a theory of arts, and in the context of the debate concerning a certain determinist formulation of “materialism” (that of G. Semper), an antinomy emerges between the perceptual or phenomenic dimension of art and its physical- material dimension. Both dimensions seem equally necessary in order to specify the peculiar condition of art, which for formalism entails the difference between the diverse artistic practices. This antinomy is linked to the formalist ambition of establishing the foundations for the autonomy of the arts by specifying them through a double principle: first, an “aesthetic” principle, which emphasizes the specificity of the arts? different “sensuous spheres”, and secondly, a “poietic” principle, which emphasizes the plurality of the technical processes of the different arts. Eduard Hanslick (a foundational author of formalism, from the middle of the 19th century) formulated this problematic for the art of music in terms of the “elementary materials of music”. After exploring his formulation, we will quickly point to some parallelisms with formalist authors of roughly the same period such as Konrad Fiedler and Alois Riegl. We will finish by indicating how, in the future evolution of formalism as “modernism”, i.e., as the main discourse about modern art, the viewpoint of the act of artistic creation would be finally displaced by that of reception and the spectator as vantage point for treating this issue of the “materiality” of art.