Can it be argued that “post-theory art” affords visual artists and musicians–and their viewers and listeners–an expansion beyond traditional discursive intellectual / cognitive theoretical frameworks . . . towards modes of artistic expression that are not just intellectual and cognitive (the head), but that are also felt in the heart (emotion) and in the body (somatic or body-felt experience)? In other words, is it possible for “art” make “theory” become an embodied experience that both reaches human emotions and also causes a physical sensory experience?
This essay explores the possibility of whether post-theory art as an art practice or genre within traditional conceptual art and post-conceptual art might potentially distinguish itself as meaningfully distinct. Normally, the distinction between conceptual art and post-theory art turns on numerosity or multiplicity–if a conceptual artwork is about one idea at a time, singular, then a post-theory artwork is distinguished as being about the connection and relation of many ideas, plural.
But what if post-theory art also allows artists to convey and communicate “theory” across artistic mediums, including without limitation visual art, music, poetry, literature, and video/cinema, not solely through (a) intellectual discourse–the head– but also through the uniquely human capacities of (b) emotion–the heart–and also (c) the somatic–the sensory, body-felt experience?
This is an initial discussion that draws on just a few of the potentially relevant artists, thinkers, and theorists who have considered parts of this question in other contexts. Even thought it is just an initial discussion based on initial research, this paper may be seen to underscore the irreplaceable role of human agency in creating and interpreting art in ways that transcend mere intellectualization. In other words, even though machines and the artificial can now make theories too, not just us, there seems seems to be something about human theory-making and human theory-receiving that goes beyond the cognitive and also reaches the unique human capacities of emotions and the unique human capacities of sense, including body-felt experiences.
Beyond Theory As Merely Cognitive: Theory in Art as Emotion Felt in the Heart and Sensory Experience Felt in the Body
Arguably, the modern historical development of art theory has often emphasized linguistic and structural analyses–cognitive analyses– as sometimes seen in the works of Clement Greenberg, and as sometimes seen in the the structuralist and post-structuralist critiques of the late 20th century. Speaking loosely, at least. From this, still speaking broadly, artists like Hans Haacke, Barbara Kruger, and Jenny Holzer may be seen as artist examples of this trend, producing works that engaged viewers through textual frameworks (text-based art) and conceptual frameworks (idea-as-art with less emphasis on object-as-art and aesthetic-as-art).
It can be argued that post-theory art, while acknowledging this lineage, is also able to shift additional focus towards the experiential and embodied aspects of art. It seems to have the potential for the proposition that theory in art is not solely an intellectual exercise but can also transmitted through materiality of an artwork, sensory engagement arising from the artwork, and emotional resonance arising from the artwork.
The Limitations of Artificial Intelligence in Artistic Expression in Relation to the Heart and the Body
The advent of artificial intelligence has introduced two things relevant here: now we humans are not alone in the ability to make art, and now we humans are not alone in the ability to make theories. So far, however, AI models lack capacities in relation to the authentic and genuine in human emotions and the physical reality of human somatic (body-felt) experiences. Post-theory art and its philosophical underpinnings suggest that these are both integral to human artistic expression–and that, on that basis, human art-making and human theory-making can and should be distinguished from artificial attempts to do the same.
Materiality and the Somatic Experience
For artworks that are post-theory that are physical (painting, sculpture, installation, dance) or that are sensory (music, cinema/video, poetry, literature, and others), visual, material, textual, and sound choices in post-theory art–what the art is made of, how the art is made, and what all of it communicates to the recipient–are not merely aesthetic decisions in relation to the recipient’s eyes and ears and intellect, but rather are central to conveying, and perhaps even causing, genuine embodied experiences and genuine emotion. This part of the research needs to be developed, but there appears to be something to this possibility.
The Human “Sensorium” in Post-Theory Art
While more research is needed, it appears that it can be plausibly argued that post-theory art is relevant to the potentially increasing human need to underscore the significance of the human “sensorium” in this new era of the artificial, where the human “sensorium” refers to the human integrated system of sensory experiences–not just see, hear, taste, touch, smell, but also the integrated body-felt sensory experience that humans feel viscerally “in the gut”—in the creation and reception of art. In this sense, post-theory art and post-theory art practices and approaches may be increasingly relevant for recognizing that understanding, interpreting, and enjoying art involves more than the cognitive processes that AI can now achieve; rather, they also encompass emotional responses and bodily sensations that are, so far, to our knowledge, unique to the human species and some animal species.
Conclusion: The Irreplaceable Role of the Human, Evidenced Through Emotion and Body-Felt Sensory Experience
In an era where artificial intelligence, or empty intelligence, will increasingly permeate almost all parts of human life, including human artistic practices, post-theory art appears to have the capacity to allow artists to develop and expand existing art practices that reaffirm, and preserve and protect, the irreplaceable role of human agency in creating our own art–and our own stories–where “human agency” refers to our human capacity to act with human intention, not artificial reasoning, in relation to our making choices and decisions about ourselves as a species that are shaped by human thought, and human emotion and lived experience–not the artificial.
This means, at least in part, that post-theory art argues and examples at the same time: That there be human art that resonates not only on a cognitive level, but also emotional and somatic levels– all at the same time–for the most important of human reasons in this age.
If the somatic and the emotional can be woven into the cognitive, it may be that human-theory making can be preserved as human through the human practice of post-theory art. By being able to convey, communicate, impart, and cause the full spectrum of the human experience–head, heart, and body, all at once, post-theory art appears to offer a viable means for human artists to both contribute to, and preserve and protect,not just human theory-making about ourselves, but also human mythology-making about ourselves, before artificial intelligence creates its own myths about humanity for us.
This article is preliminary; additional research and analysis is pending.
— Written May 2025.