SEN Kiyohiro

SEN Kiyohiro (銭 清弘)

was born in Hiroshima; was raised in Yokohama; is currently living in Tokyo.

EDUCATION

• Ph.D. student, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo (2020–present)

  • Dissertation (in progress): Categorizing Art

• Master of Arts, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo (March 2020)

  • Thesis: Seeing Photographs and Seeing Through Photographs : On the Theoretical Range of Kendall Walton's Transparency Thesis [PDF]

• Bachelor of Economics, Keio University, Tokyo (March 2018)

TEACHING

• Part‐time instructor, Sagami Women's University (April 2022–), Fine Arts.

ACADEMIC WRITINGS (in English)

• Sen, Kiyohiro. 2022. "An Institutional Theory of Art Categories." Debates in Aesthetics 18(1):31–43. [PDF]

  • Winner of the 2022 Debates in Aesthetics Essay Prize

ACADEMIC WRITINGS (in Japanese)

• 銭清弘. 2021. 「制度は意図に取って代われるのか (Can Institutionalism Replace Intentionalism?)」. 『フィルカル』7(3):92–111.

• 銭清弘. 2021. 「画像がなにかを描くとはどういうことか (What Is It for Pictures to Depict Something?)」. 日本科学哲学会『新進研究者 Research Notes』4:123–131. [LINK]

• 銭清弘. 2020. 「イメージを切り貼りするとなにがどうなるのか：インターネットのミーム文化における画像使用を中心に (Cutting and Pasting Images: On the Internet Memes)」. 『フィルカル』5(2):60–81.

• 銭清弘. 2020. 「写真を見ること、写真を通して見ること : ケンダル・ウォルトンによる「透明性テーゼ」の理論的射程をめぐって (Seeing Photographs and Seeing Through Photographs: On the Theoretical Range of Kendall Walton's Transparency Thesis)」. 東京大学大学院総合文化研究科（修士論文）. [LINK]

• 銭清弘. 2019. 「写真の「透明性」とデジタルの課題―身元不明な画像たちを巡って― (Photographic Transparency and Problems of the Digital Era: On Unidentified Pictures)」. 『フィルカル』4(1):230–273.

PUBLIC WRITINGS (in Japanese)

• 銭清弘. 2022. 「スローシネマ、アピチャッポン、マジックリアリズム (Slow Cinema, Apichatpong, Magic Realism)」. 『ユリイカ 特集=アピチャッポン・ウィーラセタクン』2022(3):226–234.

• 銭清弘. 2019. 「ミームと大義なき聖戦 (Memes and a Crusade without a Cause)」. 『新蒸気波要点ガイド ヴェイパーウェイヴ・アーカイブス2009–2019』: 176–179.

•  仲山ひふみ, 銭清弘, 山形一生. 2019. 「円環に留まる倫理：Vaporwave 2.0と男性原理 (The Ethics of Staying in the Circle: Vaporwave 2.0 and the Male Principle)」. 『ユリイカ 特集=Vaporwave』2019(12): 171–.182

• 銭清弘. 2019. 「不安を与えるミームたち：さらにもう一つの（悪趣味な）Vaporwave史 (The Disquieting Memes: Yet Another (Kitsch) History of Vaporwave)」. 『ユリイカ 特集=Vaporwave』2019(12): 214–220.

• 銭清弘. 2019. 「〈デッドパン〉を工学する (Engineering Deadpan)」. 『ニューQ』2: 30–33.

•  銭清弘. 2019. 「神さまに貸しを作ること：ビリー・アイリッシュと身体のホラー (My God Is Gonna Owe Me: Billie Eilish and Body Horror)」. 『ユリイカ 特集=ビリー・アイリッシュ』2019(11): 168–177.

•  銭清弘. 2019. 「総特集＝現代思想43のキーワード - Vaporwave (Vaporwave (in 43 Keywords of Contemporary Thought))」. 『現代思想 総特集=現代思想43のキーワード』2019(5): 237–240.

BOOK REVIEWS (in Japanese)

• Abell, Catharine. 2020. Fiction: A Philosophical Analysis. 『Phantastopia』1. 2022. [LINK]

• 植原亮. 2020. 『思考力改善ドリル』. ART RESEARCH ONLINE. 2021. [LINK]

TRANSLATION (English to Japanese)

• Frank, Sibley. 2001. Approach to Aesthetics: Collected Papers on Philosophical Aesthetics (chap. 10, 13). In progress.

• Beardsley, Monroe. 1970. "Aesthetic Point of View." Philcul 6(2):328–353. 2021.

PRESENTATIONS (in Japanese)

• 銭清弘. 「制度は意図に取って代われるのか (Can Institutionalism Replace Intentionalism?)」. 哲学オンラインセミナー, ワークショップ「作者の意図、再訪」. 2022年6月4日. [LINK]

• 銭清弘. 「美的に良いものはなにゆえ良いのか：モンロー・ビアズリー再読 (What Makes Aesthetic Value Value?: Rereading Monroe Beardsley)」応用哲学会第十四回年次研究大会. 2022年5月28日. [LINK]

• 銭清弘. 「駄作を愛でる／傑作を呪う (Admiring the Worst, Cursing the Best)」. 応用哲学会第十三回年次研究大会. 2021年5月22日。[LINK]

• 銭清弘. 「画像の内容はつまるところ作者の意図によって決定されるのか (Is the Pictorial Content Determined by the Author’s Intention After All?)」. 哲学若手研究者フォーラム. 2020年9月19日. [LINK]

• 銭清弘. 「写真のなにがそんなにもスペシャルなのか：分析写真論入門 (What's so Special About Photographs?: An Introduction to the Analytic Aesthetics on Photography)」. ART RESEARCH ONLINE. 2020年8月29日. [LINK]

• 銭清弘. 「イメージを切り貼りするとなにがどうなるのか：インターネットのミーム文化における画像使用を中心に (Cutting and Pasting Images: On the Internet Memes)」. 描写の哲学研究会 . 2020年1月25日. [LINK]

• 銭清弘. 「不気味な写真の美学 (The Aesthetics of Uncanny Photographs)」. 哲学若手研究者フォーラム. 2019年7月14日. [LINK]

[Criticism｜Interpretation and Evaluation] 

We perceive, interpret, and evaluate works of art. Criticism can be understood as the act of communicating various judgments in art appreciation. What is the purpose and nature of criticism? How do the categories of artworks (genre, form, style, media, etc.) affect criticism? Can the correct meaning and value of a work of art be determined? To what extent/how involved is the artist's intention?

[The Aesthetic｜Value and Experience] 

The inquiry into the aesthetic is at the core of the discipline of aesthetics. What are aesthetic value, experience, judgment, and attitude, rather than value, experience, judgment, and attitude in general? How do they differ from and overlap with ethical, economic, and practical values and experiences? Can aesthetic value be explained in terms of an item giving pleasure?

[Depiction｜Pictorial Representation] 

Pictures (paintings, photographs, sketches, prints and so on) depict something, and we can access that something by looking at the design on the surface of pictures. The way pictures have their contents seems to be different from that of language. What makes it possible for pictures to depict something?

[Photography｜Film]

Are there any crucial differences between the different depictive media (painting, sketching, photography, graphs) ? Unlike handmade pictures such as paintings, photographic images, which are produced through a mechanical process, seem to have distinct character. According to Kendall Walton, photographs are transparent and  you can literally see the object just like mirrors, telescopes, or glasses. According to Roger Scruton, photographic images, which only causally capture the appearance of things, cannot be artistic representations. How far/To what extent are these discourses on photography valid?

[Analytic Aesthetics, Misc.]

Analytic aesthetics is a branch of analytic philosophy and is the predominant aesthetic study in the English-speaking world today, whose root is the works of Monroe Beardsley, Frank Sibley, George Dickie, and others who discussed the philosophy of criticism, the definition of art, the aesthetic, and so on in the 1950s and 1960s. The school is characterized by clear argumentation and refinement through mutual criticism.