Search results

A collection of essays by a social economist seeking to balance economics as a science of means with the values deemed necessary to man′s finding the good life and society enduring as a civilized instrumentality. Looks for authority to great men of the past and to today′s moral philosopher: man is an ethical animal. The 13 essays are: 1. Evolutionary Economics: The End of It All? which challenges the view that Darwinism destroyed belief in a universe of purpose and design; 2. Schmoller′s Political Economy: Its Psychic, Moral and Legal Foundations, which centres on the belief that time‐honoured ethical values prevail in an economy formed by ties of common sentiment, ideas, customs and laws; 3. Adam Smith by Gustav von Schmoller – Schmoller rejects Smith′s natural law and sees him as simply spreading the message of Calvinism; 4. Pierre‐Joseph Proudhon, Socialist – Karl Marx, Communist: A Comparison; 5. Marxism and the Instauration of Man, which raises the question for Marx: is the flowering of the new man in Communist society the ultimate end to the dialectical movement of history?; 6. Ethical Progress and Economic Growth in Western Civilization; 7. Ethical Principles in American Society: An Appraisal; 8. The Ugent Need for a Consensus on Moral Values, which focuses on the real dangers inherent in there being no consensus on moral values; 9. Human Resources and the Good Society – man is not to be treated as an economic resource; man′s moral and material wellbeing is the goal; 10. The Social Economist on the Modern Dilemma: Ethical Dwarfs and Nuclear Giants, which argues that it is imperative to distinguish good from evil and to act accordingly: existentialism, situation ethics and evolutionary ethics savour of nihilism; 11. Ethical Principles: The Economist′s Quandary, which is the difficulty of balancing the claims of disinterested science and of the urge to better the human condition; 12. The Role of Government in the Advancement of Cultural Values, which discusses censorship and the funding of art against the background of the US Helms Amendment; 13. Man at the Crossroads draws earlier themes together; the author makes the case for rejecting determinism and the “operant conditioning” of the Skinner school in favour of the moral progress of autonomous man through adherence to traditional ethical values.

The aim of the study is to contribute to the extending body of literature on ‘the different effects of cultural engagement’ through cases from Turkey. In the context of art and society interaction, the study seeks to find evidence from practice within the scope of the ‘cultural value’ and ‘arts marketing’ literature. ‘Co-creation’ is mentioned as an important term in the cultural engagement context, and purposeful co-creation acts are investigated in the art industry. Therefore, the research focuses on interaction in the context of culture in order to explore the complex nature of co-creation of cultural value in alternative places and cultural frames. From this perspective, the study underlines the roles of place and atmosphere in the cultural engagement process. The cultural engagement areas of art and the public are determined in three different fields: nature (art in the village), science (campus) and business (shopping mall). The case study research is realised in order to gain a detailed and holistic view of the process. While the intention of all art events is the interaction of art and society, all three cases lead to different dimensions of ‘cultural engagement’ in different contexts. In this manner, these different cultural frames enlarge our comprehensive view of the constitution of ‘art and cultural value’ in terms of place and cultural frame of the field. The study underlines that society-oriented local art events and organisations are supporting the art and society link rather than focussing the economic value of art and artists as the actors of a commercial art industry.

There is a long association between the arts and mental well‐being, but this can also be an area of contest and debate. In this commentary on the issues raised by the papers in this special arts and mental well‐being issue of the journal, James Oliver and Paul Murray question the attempt to impose scientific measures of outcome on arts participation, and ask if we should not, instead, regard access to opportunities for creative expression as a legal right and moral duty owing to those whom we, as a society, have excluded from the mainstream through incarceration or labelling.

Michael Brown argues that what unites the human and social sciences is their evolving character, made explicit in the concepts of “reflexivity,” “course of activity,” and “theorizing.” Once the social sciences are taken as a whole, the notion of “sociality” will allow to grasp society as ever changing, as a becoming. I shall examine the notion of sociality in the literary criticism of Lukács, Goldmann, and Adorno, three authors who consider the essay as the adequate open form of critique in times of rapid social change. Originally adopted by the young Lukács, the essay tended to be abandoned by him when elaborating the concept of critical or socialist realism as a repository of timeless cultural values. In his studies in the European realist or the soviet novel, for example, on Balzac, Stendhal, Thomas Mann, or Solzhenitsyn, the dialectical concept of social totality becomes a sum of orientations, presenting the individual writer with the moral task to choose “progress” and discard “negativity.” The social is thus narrowed to individual choice. Different from Lukács, Goldmann's literary theory defines cultural production as a matter of the social group, the transindividual subject. Goldmann was deeply marked by Lukács's early writings from which he gained notably the notion of tragedy and the concept of maximum possible consciousness—the world vision of a social group which structures the work of a writer. Cultural creation is resistance to capitalist society, as evident in the literature of absence, Malraux's novels, and the nouveau roman. In the writings of Adorno the social is lodged within the avant-garde, provided that one takes its means and procedures literally, e.g., the writings of Kafka. By formal innovation—among others the adoption of the essay, the small form, the fragment—art exercises criticism of the ongoing rationalization process and preserves the possibility of change (p. 319).

The purpose of this paper is to explore the professional biography of Ethel A. Stephens, examining her career as an artist and a teacher in Sydney between 1890 and 1920. Accounts of (both male and female) artists in this period often dismiss their teaching as just a means to pay the bills. This paper focuses attention on Stephens’ teaching and considers how this, combined with her artistic practice, influenced her students.

Using a fragmentary record of a successful female artist and teacher, this paper considers the role of art education and a career in the arts for respectable middle-class women.

Stephens’ actions and experiences show the ways she negotiated between the public and private sphere. Close examination of her “at home” exhibitions demonstrates one way in which these worlds came together as sites, enabling her to identify as an artist, a teacher and as a respectable middle-class woman.

This paper offers insight into the ways women negotiated the Sydney art scene and found opportunities for art education outside of the established modes.

Autonomy, unity, identity: these three themes and ideals have been pursued by nationalist thinkers everywhere since Rousseau and Herder (Hutchinson & Smith, 1994). Zionism, founded in Europe at the end of the nineteenth century,¹ is a particular case of a national movement, putting into practice the idea of a political community located within the boundaries of a single nation-state. Yet, at the same time, the Jewish nation-building process, which began in Palestine in 1881 and achieved its aim of independence in the spring of 1948, with the establishment of the State of Israel under the political leadership of the Labor movement, was unusual in its complexity and marked, from its inception, by dramatic struggles over the distribution of power.

Art is a complex, multiform, fluid human activity that is subjugated to time-space-place contexts and dependent upon social representation and values. But what is it for? This introduction to the book Art in Diverse Social settings begins with a general characterization of Art as universal language. Unlike verbal language, art is primarily processed in the sensorial and emotional fields and only later rationally; unlike science, it does not aim at explaining or predicting the laws of the world's phenomena, instead it communicates by showing (in essence, it has an expressive meaning). In today's world, art became an accessible good and a valuable human creation because of this reappraisal of artistic practices; art is today expressive in domains such as politics, citizenship, economy, ethics, sustainability or public affairs.

The introduction to this edited book explains why it is focused on the role of art in today's diverse society. Art is part of the worldviews and mindsets from which it results and as a complex and ambiguous product of culture and perception, it must be understood from multiple perspectives. As such, this book includes in the first part seminal chapters with a theoretical scope, which highlight conceptual, contextual and cultural issues of contemporary art. The chapters in the second and third parts of the book are exemplary case studies, describing concrete intervention projects, which use some form of art or composed artistic expression as a medium for communication and intervention in the contexts of social and professional organizations, public spaces or the community. A summary of each chapter is provided and linked to the main goal of the book.

What are the value theories used by art economists which can help define the field as a unique research program? We categorize the research program in art economics in Lakatosian terms and find that art economists share a value system around art which is that art contains value beyond that of exchange. This difference introduces a “paradox” of value to be addressed (either implicitly or explicitly) by the art economist in practice, in that mainstream economics assumes value is realized through exchange only. We then survey the literature and find evidence to support this value paradox claim. We also find that the art economics research program does not adequately address the potentiality of the state using art as instrumental value and introduce political economy to factor in a self-interested state using art production as a means to reproduce and ideally expand state legitimacy and power in society. We then give two examples of art-statism in practice to illustrate the possibility of art’s instrumentality.