Ir al menú de navegación principal Ir al contenido principal Ir al pie de página del sitio
Logo Thémata

Monográfico "Confluencias estéticas entre cotidianidad y naturaleza"

Núm. 72 (2025): Thémata Revista de Filosofía

Respecting the Hexagon: Honeycomb Ornament and Attentive Practices in Bee-Art

DOI
https://doi.org/10.12795/themata.2025.i72.05
Enviado
septiembre 15, 2025
Publicado
2025-12-31

Resumen

La creciente atención cultural a las abejas, ejemplificada por las colmenas del Museo de Arte Moderno de Nueva York, plantea la cuestión de hasta qué punto pueden considerarse cocreadoras de arte. Este artículo entrelaza la noción de ornamento de György Lukács, la estética del cuidado de Yuriko Saito y el concepto de devenir animal de Gilles Deleuze para examinar la colaboración interespecies. La obra del artista checo Jan Karpíšek muestra cómo la apicultura y el arte apícola desafían las nociones antropocéntricas de autoría. El artículo invita a repensar a los animales como cocreadores en el arte, destacando el respeto y la estética interespecies como vitales para comprender la agencia no humana.

Citas

  1. Baker, Steve. "What Does Becoming-Animal Look Like?". Representing Animals, ed. Nigel Rothfels. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2002. 67–98.
  2. Beuys, Joseph. Honey Pump at the Workplace. Installation at Documenta 6, Kassel, 1977. Exhibition work.
  3. Deleuze, Gilles, and Félix Guattari. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. Brian Massumi. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2005.
  4. Dong, Shihao, and others. “Social Signal Learning of the Waggle Dance in Honey Bees”.Science 379 (2023): 995–998. DOI: 10.1126/science.ade1702. Accessed 2 Sept. 2025.
  5. Donovan, Josephine. The Aesthetics of Care: On the Literary Treatment of Animals. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2016.
  6. Dyck, Aganetha. Glass Dress: Lady in Waiting. 1992–1998, mixed media with beeswax, National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa.
  7. Feketéné Ferenczi, Aliz, István Szűcs, and Andrea Bauerné Gáthy. “What’s Good for the Bees Will Be Good for Us! A Qualitative Study of the Factors Influencing Beekeeping Activity”. Agriculture 14/6 (2024): 890–909. DOI: 10.3390/agriculture14060890. Accessed 11 Sept. 2025.
  8. Fischer, Dorothee. “Art Between Species: Two Case Studies of Animals’ Agency in Interspecies Art.” Journal of the LUCAS Graduate Conference 8 (2020): 67–92. https://hdl.handle.net/1887/123086.Accessed 2Nov. 2025.
  9. Fišerová, Michaela. “Composing and Decomposing: A Deleuzian Account of Ornamental Repetition”. Deleuze and Guattari Studies 19/1 (2025): 86–104.
  10. Foucault, Michel.“What Is an Author?”. Aesthetics, Method, and Epistemology: Essential Works of Foucault, 1954–1984, Volume 2, ed. James D. Faubion and trans. Robert Hurley. New York: The New Press, 1998.205–222.
  11. Green, Kelsey, and Franklin Ginn. “The Smell of Selfless Love: Sharing Vulnerability with Bees in Alternative Apiculture”. Environmental Humanities 4/1 (2014): 149–170. DOI: 10.1215/22011919-3614971. Accessed 11 Sept. 2025.
  12. Huyghe, Pierre. Untilled. Installation at Documenta 13, Kassel, 2012. Exhibition work.
  13. Karpíšek, Jan. “Texty, bibliografie”. Jan Karpíšek. www.jankarpisek.com/texty-bibliografie. Accessed 11 Sept. 2025.
  14. Karpíšek, Jan, Radka Kaclerová, and Michael Luetchford. Vývěr ze sbírek. Tišnov: Josef Jambor Gallery, 2020. Exhibition catalogue.
  15. Kosut, Mary, and Lisa Jean Moore. “Bees Making Art: Insect Aesthetics and the Ecological Moment”. Humanimalia 5/2 (2014): 1–25. DOI: 10.52537/humanimalia.9949. Accessed 11 Sept. 2025.
  16. Kracauer, Siegfried. The Mass Ornament: Weimar Essays. Ed. and trans. Thomas Y. Levin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1995.
  17. Lee, Lenka. “Deleuze and the Rule of Ornament.” Deleuze and Guattari Studies 19/1 (2025): 53–71. DOI: 10.3366/dlgs.2025.0580. Accessed 11 Sept. 2025.
  18. Lukács, György. The Specificity of the Aesthetic, Volume I. Ed. and trans. Erik Bachman. Leiden: Brill, 2023.
  19. Massumi, Brian. A User’s Guide to Capitalism and Schizophrenia: Deviations from Deleuze and Guattari. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992.
  20. Remmers, Rutger, and Niki Frantzeskaki. “Bees in the City: Findings from a Scoping Review and Recommendations for Urban Planning”. Ambio 53 (2024): 1281–1295. DOI: 10.1007/s13280-024-02028-1. Accessed 13 Sept. 2025.
  21. Saito, Yuriko. Aesthetics of Care: Practice in Everyday Life. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2022.
  22. Saito, Yuriko. Aesthetics of the Familiar: Everyday Life and World-Making. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
  23. Saito, Yuriko. Everyday Aesthetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
  24. Shiner, Larry. The Invention of Art: A Cultural History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001.
  25. Sponsler, Douglas B., and Eve Z. Bratman. “Beekeeping in/of/for the City? A Socioecological Perspective on Urban Apiculture”.People and Nature 3/3 (2021): 550–566. DOI: 10.1002/pan3.10212. Accessed 11 Sept. 2025.
  26. Sueur, Cédric, and others. “Exploration of the Creative Processes in Animals, Robots, and AI: Who Holds the Authorship?”. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 11/ 611 (2024): 1–12. DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-03125-y. Accessed 6Nov. 2025.
  27. TV Divutvor. “Jan Karpíšek – Včelíinterakce v zahradnímateliéru”.YouTube. 8 June 2025. www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLbyo3cQI_w. Accessed 11 Sept. 2025.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.