Marlies De De Munck

The Immersive Experience of Art: Deception or Emancipation? The immersive experience plays an increasingly important role in the contemporary experience of art. Digital and multimedia technologies are used to make works of art accessible to a broad and diverse audience. In popular discourse, this evolution is often framed in a narrative of democratization and social emancipation through the participation in art. In the background of that narrative resounds the Schillerian ideal of aesthetic Bildung, which regards the experience of beauty as a necessary condition for achieving individual and political freedom. The question, however, is whether the contemporary immersive art experience is not fundamentally different from the pre-digital aesthetic experience, and what the repercussions of this would be for its emancipatory potential. This contribution examines the aesthetic characteristics of the immersive experience, including a case study of the work Sleep by the post-classical composer Max Richter, in order to assess the extent to which the contemporary immersive art experience can be understood as a continuation or, on the contrary, a departure from the Schillerian vision of art.

By pitting John Cage against Andy Warhol, Arthur Danto shows how the arts themselves were gripped by a progressive logic that aimed at only one goal: to overcome the gap between art and life. The non‐tautological reading preserves a fundamental, philosophical difference between commonplace and art objects. The semantical space accounts for the aboutness of the work and is thus the necessary condition for something to be an artwork. Together with other Pop artists, Rauschenberg transformed the Artworld, while Cage aimed at a re‐enfranchisement of the commonplace. Danto writes that his Buddhist phase came to an end when he, as a philosopher, felt the need for theories. The works of Fluxus and Cage, in the end, accepted asylum within the sanctuary of the Artworld, where they became less radical, and perhaps less radical than Pop.

Today, academic research in the human and social sciences is dominated by analytical, objectivistic methods that push an aesthetic understanding and interpretation of the world beyond the ranks of science. This not only deprives the modern project of a humanistic kind of knowledge. The individualistic career model that is sanctified by the contemporary scientific ideal of detachment also thwarts the collective modern dream of progress. However, this article argues that aesthetic thinking and dreaming of a better future are substantial parts of the original modern project, as we see in the early modern thinking of Descartes and Bacon. This article wants to revalue aesthesis as an essential part of knowledge and pleas, in line with Nietzsche, for a sensibly audacious science.