- Trinity College Dublin, French, Graduate Studentadd
- Art History, Psychoanalysis, Marcel Duchamp, Jacques Lacan, Modern and Contemporary Art, Slavoj Žižek, and 15 moreWord and Image Studies, Visual Culture, New Media, Lacanian psychoanalysis, Lacanian theory, Concepts of Modernism and Postmodernism, Psychoanalysis and art, Facebook Studies, Digital Media, Digital Humanities, Advertising, Mediated Communication, Mass media, Social Networks, and Critical Theoryedit
- It gives me great pleasure to announce that my book, Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain: One Hundred Years Later is now availa... moreIt gives me great pleasure to announce that my book, Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain: One Hundred Years Later is now available in hardback and e-book format here:
http://www.palgrave.com/de/book/9783319691572
It is also possible to download individual chapters here: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-69158-9
Some say it is an act of provocation; others, that it is a work of art.
Now, to mark the 100th anniversary of the most influential work of art of the 20th century, I offer a radically new reading of Fountain that fundamentally challenges received assumptions and calls for a new direction in art historical scholarship.
I received my Ph.D. from Trinity College Dublin in 2016. My doctoral thesis, entitled Marcel Duchamp: Resolving the Word/Image Problem, Afterthought, radically re-evaluates the writings and art-works of the French artist Marcel Duchamp from the perspective of the French psychoanalyst Jacques Lacan. The central argument is that Duchamp’s oeuvre emerges from a precise psychoanalytic approach to painting and that Lacan’s theoretical framework has its origins in an acute iconological understanding of the clinical setting. In bringing together Duchamp with Lacan, I give a central role to the philosopher, psychoanalyst and cultural theorist Slavoj Žižek, whose work I critically re-examine.
My work revolves around three central axes. First, through the lens of the word/image dichotomy, I am attempting to develop Duchamp’s oeuvre into a tool for the analysis of visual culture. In doing so, I adapt Žižek’s approach to ideology critique along aesthetic lines in order to determine the role of digital technology within the dynamics of 21st century capitalism. Finally, on a broader institutional level, my work attempts to redefine the terms of the disciplinary exchange between Art History and Psychoanalysis with a view to mapping a new model for Humanities scholarship, what I term “infra-disciplinarity”.
While my research interests fall within the field of French Studies and between the disciplines of Art History and Psychoanalysis, I also engage in Philosophy, Critical Theory, and Visual/Digital Culture. I have published in several international peer-reviewed journals across all of these diverse fields. I currently work in the Department of Applied Foreign Languages and History of Art and Archaeology at Paris Sorbonne University Abu Dhabi, where I teach courses on Modern and Contemporary Art, Art History in the Age of Globalization, Aesthetics and Visual Culture.
Trinity College Dublin
Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.), French Studies
2009 - 2015
Thesis title: 'Marcel Duchamp: Resolving the Word/Image Problematic, afterthought'
Supervisor: Prof. David Scott
Trinity College Dublin
Master of Philosophy (M.Phil.), Textual and Visual Studies: 19th and 20th Century France
2007 - 2008
Thesis title: 'Renvoi Miroirique: Re-contextualizing the Lacanian Real through the Duchampian Gesture'
Supervisor: Prof. David Scott
University College Dublin
Bachelor of Arts (B.A.), Honors French and Honors Art History
2002 - 2006
Awards:
Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences (IRCHSS) Postgraduate Scholarship (2009 - 2012)
A.J. Leventhal Scholarship, Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Social Studies, Trinity College (2012)
A.J. Leventhal Scholarship, Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Social Studies, Trinity College (2010)edit
2017 marks the centenary of an artwork judged to be the single most influential of the twentieth century: Marcel Duchamp’s famous “readymade” entitled Fountain. The final verdict on Fountain has been widely accepted, despite the fact that... more
2017 marks the centenary of an artwork judged to be the single most influential of the twentieth century: Marcel Duchamp’s famous “readymade” entitled Fountain. The final verdict on Fountain has been widely accepted, despite the fact that the circumstances surrounding “Mr. Richard Mutt” have never resembled an open-and-shut case. On the contrary, since Fountain’s appearance in 1917, when it was rejected as “a plain piece of plumbing” only to be subsequently celebrated as a work of conceptual art, numerous questions remain unanswered, several facts remain unexplained.
Now, one hundred years later, Robert Kilroy attempts to answer these questions by examining the evidence with fresh eyes. Central to the investigation is the primary witness – Duchamp himself – whose statements are forensically analyzed. The facts themselves are interrogated using the methodology of a detective: precisely speaking, an art historical approach with a critical edge sharpened by a new interpretation of psychoanalytic theory.
In weaving an alternative narrative, Kilroy shows us that, not only has Fountain been fundamentally misunderstood, this very misunderstanding is central to the work’s significance. The final verdict, he argues, was strategically stage-managed by Duchamp in order to expose the apparatus underpinning Fountain’s reception, what he terms “The Creative Act.” By suggesting that a specific aesthetic “crime” has gone unnoticed, Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain: One Hundred Years Later asks the reader to radically reassess his/her precise contribution to “the creation of art.” This urgent, if somewhat troubling question, could have far-reaching implications for the field of scholarship, the course of contemporary art and the discipline of Art history.
Now, one hundred years later, Robert Kilroy attempts to answer these questions by examining the evidence with fresh eyes. Central to the investigation is the primary witness – Duchamp himself – whose statements are forensically analyzed. The facts themselves are interrogated using the methodology of a detective: precisely speaking, an art historical approach with a critical edge sharpened by a new interpretation of psychoanalytic theory.
In weaving an alternative narrative, Kilroy shows us that, not only has Fountain been fundamentally misunderstood, this very misunderstanding is central to the work’s significance. The final verdict, he argues, was strategically stage-managed by Duchamp in order to expose the apparatus underpinning Fountain’s reception, what he terms “The Creative Act.” By suggesting that a specific aesthetic “crime” has gone unnoticed, Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain: One Hundred Years Later asks the reader to radically reassess his/her precise contribution to “the creation of art.” This urgent, if somewhat troubling question, could have far-reaching implications for the field of scholarship, the course of contemporary art and the discipline of Art history.
Research Interests: Psychoanalysis, Art History, Interdisciplinarity, Contemporary Art, Modern Art, and 25 moreJacques Lacan, Slavoj Žižek, T.S. Eliot, Lacanian theory, History of Art, Freud and Lacan, Slavoj Zizek, Alain Badiou, Ideology Critique, Zizek, Dada In Europe & New York (Man Ray & M. Duchamp), Interdisciplinary Studies, T. S. Eliot, Iconology, Marcel Duchamp, Psychoanalysis and art, Lacanian psychoanalysis, Panofsky, Iconography and Iconology, Erwin Panofsky, Psychoanalysis (Freud and Lacan), Critique of Ideology, Psychoanalytical Art History and Theory, The Duchampian Readymade, and Readymade Art
Research Interests: Jean-Luc Nancy, Jacques Lacan, Slavoj Žižek, Lacanian theory, Postmodernism, and 9 moreSlavoj Zizek, Modernism, Jacques Derrida & Deconstruction, Marcel Duchamp, Lacanian psychoanalysis, Philippe Lacoue-Labarthe, Post-structuralism (especially the work of Jacques Derrida), The Duchampian Readymade, and Lacoue-Labarthe, Philippe
In the updated preface to the 2008 edition of his seminal work The Sublime Object of Ideology, Slavoj Žižek writes that “when a discipline is in crisis, attempts are made to change or supplement its theses within the terms of its basic... more
In the updated preface to the 2008 edition of his seminal work The Sublime Object of Ideology, Slavoj Žižek writes that “when a discipline is in crisis, attempts are made to change or supplement its theses within the terms of its basic framework – a procedure one might call ‘Ptolemization’”. The alternative, he claims, is a “true ‘Copernican’ revolution” which takes place “when, instead of just adding complications and changing minor premises, the basic framework itself undergoes a transformation” (Žižek 2008: vii). In light of these remarks, the central question posed in this paper is as follows: how might Žižek’s distinction between a Ptomelization and Copernican revolution be applied to the field of Žižek Studies today? How, in other words, might we seek to re-evaluate Žižek’s work in a way that includes the mechanisms of evaluation as part of the observed phenomena? The working hypothesis is that, as Žižekians, we must reassert the fundamental rule of psychoanalysis as articulated by Žižek himself: one must remember to include as part of the content of the message communicated, the act of communication itself (Žižek 2008: 21). In short, when it comes to the reception of Žižek’s thought we should remember Žižek’s basic point that “the question to ask is always: is this truly a Copernician revolution, or merely a Ptolemization of the old paradigm?” (Žižek 2008: vii).
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This essay considers the question of “naming” by re-examining the works of the artist Marcel Duchamp on the basis of the conceptual apparatus developed by the Lacanian psychoanalyst and philosopher Slavoj Žižek. For Žižek, naming is... more
This essay considers the question of “naming” by re-examining the works of the artist Marcel Duchamp on the basis of the conceptual apparatus developed by the Lacanian psychoanalyst and philosopher Slavoj Žižek. For Žižek, naming is understood in terms of its broader social-symbolic texture as a ritualistic, meaning making activity that constitutes the zero level of collectivized belief. The act of appellation is thus seen to function as a strategic operation insofar as it is the fundamental bedrock of ideological interpellation—a performative gesture that situates its bearer as “subject.” As I argue, through his use of titles in general and his Fountain-Urinal in particular, Duchamp openly stages this operation within the parameters of the aesthetic field. In doing so, Duchamp’s oeuvre might be said to render visible the fundamental co-ordinates of Žižek’s theoretical framework while at the same time becoming re-habilitated to its psychoanalytic core.
Au travers d’une ré-interrogation de l’oeuvre de Marcel Duchamp, cette
contribution se propose d’explorer l’acte de nommer d’un point de vue
psychanalytique. Selon le philosophe et psychanalyste lacanien Slavoj Žižek, l’acte de nommer est à considérer dans toute sa texture socio-symbolique. C’est un acte ritualisé significatif qui constitue la base de la croyance collective. L’acte de nommer fonctionne donc à la manière d’une opération stratégique car c’est le socle de l’interpellation idéologique – c’est un geste performatif qui
fait de son énonciateur un « sujet ». Ce sont les titres des oeuvres de Duchamp, et en particulier son readymade connu sous le titre de Fontaine, qui rendent visible cette fonction idéologique sur un plan esthétique. Ainsi, Duchamp fait apparaître les coordonnées fondamentales du cadre théorique žižekien et, par un même mouvement, l’oeuvre duchampienne retrouve son essence psychanalytique.
Au travers d’une ré-interrogation de l’oeuvre de Marcel Duchamp, cette
contribution se propose d’explorer l’acte de nommer d’un point de vue
psychanalytique. Selon le philosophe et psychanalyste lacanien Slavoj Žižek, l’acte de nommer est à considérer dans toute sa texture socio-symbolique. C’est un acte ritualisé significatif qui constitue la base de la croyance collective. L’acte de nommer fonctionne donc à la manière d’une opération stratégique car c’est le socle de l’interpellation idéologique – c’est un geste performatif qui
fait de son énonciateur un « sujet ». Ce sont les titres des oeuvres de Duchamp, et en particulier son readymade connu sous le titre de Fontaine, qui rendent visible cette fonction idéologique sur un plan esthétique. Ainsi, Duchamp fait apparaître les coordonnées fondamentales du cadre théorique žižekien et, par un même mouvement, l’oeuvre duchampienne retrouve son essence psychanalytique.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
At first glance, there would appear to be very little connection between the recent photo of Barack Obama posing for a ‘selfie’ at the memorial service for Nelson Mandela and one of the canonical works of modern art, Edouard Manet’s Le... more
At first glance, there would appear to be very little connection between the recent photo of Barack Obama posing for a ‘selfie’ at the memorial service for Nelson Mandela and one of the canonical works of modern art, Edouard Manet’s Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe. However, upon reflection one might discover a surprising connection: on one side, a celebration of revolutionary politics debased by the obscenities of popular culture; on the other, an adoration of idealized beauty subverted by a revolutionary turn towards modern life. And yet, such a reading would continue to miss the radical, even disturbing, connection between the two images: they are, in fact, two sides of the same phenomenon whose encounter establishes what Slavoj Žižek has termed ‘an impossible short-circuit of levels which, for structural reasons, can never meet’ (Žižek, Interrogating the Real, edited by Rex Butler and Scott Stephens, London: Continuum, 2006, 11).
In this text I wish to argue that the ‘parallax’ perspective required to grasp this impossible relation can be found in the writings of Charles Baudelaire. Baudelaire’s seminal essay The Painter of Modern Life (Le Peintre de la Vie Moderne) has, of course, been consecrated in what Marcel Duchamp calls ‘the primers of art history’ (The Writings of Marcel Duchamp, edited by Michael Sanouillet and Elmer Peterson, New York: Da Capo Press, 1973, 138) as the source of the avant-garde impulse, a ‘call to arms’ for the modern artist. Nevertheless, as a critical discourse it remains, to this day, rather strange and unsettling. Although it draws out the motifs and themes that would become central to the new movement, there are many deadlocks and distortions in the text itself which block a complete and coherent reading.
In my contribution I propose a re-examination of Manet’s image and Baudelaire’s text which reconsiders such gaps and slippages not as obstacles to be overcome but as solutions in themselves, what in the praxis of psychoanalysis is termed a ‘symptom’ and what Žižek redefines through his notion of a ‘parallax’ gap. In doing so, I will attempt to argue that Manet’s painting and Baudelaire’s essay function, on respective visual and verbal levels, as an ‘unmasking gesture of psychoanalysis’ (Žižek, The Sublime Object of Ideology, London: Verso, 2008, 25). Ultimately, by adopting this method I will produce a text of my own which, by developing the central themes of the two images in question, renders explicit their impossible relation.
In this text I wish to argue that the ‘parallax’ perspective required to grasp this impossible relation can be found in the writings of Charles Baudelaire. Baudelaire’s seminal essay The Painter of Modern Life (Le Peintre de la Vie Moderne) has, of course, been consecrated in what Marcel Duchamp calls ‘the primers of art history’ (The Writings of Marcel Duchamp, edited by Michael Sanouillet and Elmer Peterson, New York: Da Capo Press, 1973, 138) as the source of the avant-garde impulse, a ‘call to arms’ for the modern artist. Nevertheless, as a critical discourse it remains, to this day, rather strange and unsettling. Although it draws out the motifs and themes that would become central to the new movement, there are many deadlocks and distortions in the text itself which block a complete and coherent reading.
In my contribution I propose a re-examination of Manet’s image and Baudelaire’s text which reconsiders such gaps and slippages not as obstacles to be overcome but as solutions in themselves, what in the praxis of psychoanalysis is termed a ‘symptom’ and what Žižek redefines through his notion of a ‘parallax’ gap. In doing so, I will attempt to argue that Manet’s painting and Baudelaire’s essay function, on respective visual and verbal levels, as an ‘unmasking gesture of psychoanalysis’ (Žižek, The Sublime Object of Ideology, London: Verso, 2008, 25). Ultimately, by adopting this method I will produce a text of my own which, by developing the central themes of the two images in question, renders explicit their impossible relation.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
One of the dominant critical trends in art historical