Lee Walters (Southampton): The Unforgeable
| Dates: | 23 February 2016 |
|---|
| Times: | 15:00 - 17:00 |
|---|
| What is it: | Seminar |
|---|
| Organiser: | School of Social Sciences |
|---|
| Who is it for: | University staff, Adults, Alumni, Current University students |
|---|
| Speaker: | Lee Walters |
|---|
|
Abstract: in music, unlike painting, there is no such thing as a forgery of a known work. There are, indeed, compositions falsely purporting to be by Haydn as there are paintings falsely purporting to be by Rembrandt; but of the London Symphony, unlike the Lucretia, there can be no forgeries. Why this difference between the two arts? (Goodman 1976: 112-113)
Goodman, and Janaway argue that music cannot be forged because anything instantiating the sound structure of a work W and presented as an instance of W is itself an instance of W. Levinson disagrees, arguing that in order for x to be an instance of W, x must stand in the correct causal-intensional relations to W. As such, Levinson argues that there can, in fact, be forgeries of particular works of music. I suggest that the extant debate has been characterised by a number of presuppositions that that have not been adequately justified. I argue that particular pieces of music can indeed be forged, but my argument does not rely on Levinson's claim about instances. But that particular pieces of music can be forged does not show that music and painting are on a par. Indeed I show that paintings are susceptible to a type of forgery that music is not. I then provide an account of the unforgeable in terms of causal relations without taking a stand on the debate between Goodman, Janaway, and Levinson about instances of artworks.
Travel and Contact Information
Find event
Theatre A
Zochonis Building
Manchester
