BOTH-AND: On the need for a 'textural' sociology of art
2019, EDUFBA - Editora Universttaria. All rights reserved. One of the recurring dilemmas in the sociology of art has been how to balance "internalist" and "ex-ternalist" accounts of an esthetic phenomena (i. e., aesthetic and social explanations); or, what this paper terms the necessity of moving from an either-or model of art and society to adopting a both-and logic. In the last few years, the conceptual dilemmas have been further heightened by developments such as capitalism becoming more explicitly cultural; and knowledges about art and aesthetics moving from the realm of the "grand" and the high cultural to the more prosaic and the everyday. This paper proposes that a solution to the ongoing dilemmas of the sociology of art, and the current challenge of the proliferation of arts/aesthetics-knowledge bases, is to adopt a textural rather than textural mode of thinking. The textural paradigm was first developed in thinking about place and is especially well-suit-ed to thinking through problems in the sociology of architecture and urbanism - including the problem of how the urban fabric, at times, starts to unravel; or why some unlikely architectural styles are able to stage comebacks (e. g., brutalism coming back into fashion).