Paper short abstract:

Based on the analysis of artists working with shadows (Yamashita, Kagan, Gallagher), the talk delimits the range of an anthropology of shadows and proposes an unbiased reassessment of 'light's dark sibling'.

Paper long abstract:

Where there is light, there is shadow. But is it? The ontological status of shadows is far from clear. Even though shadows may serve all kinds of concrete purposes (as symptoms, signs, media, markers, artwork, etc.), they remain hard to grasp. Are they something, or just "holes in light" (Baxandall) - a special form of nothingness?

From an anthropological perspective, three aspects of the shadow need closer scrutiny: its functioning as sort of a hybrid - yet meaningful - 'quasi-object' (Serres), its refusal to fit into a simple agent/patient dichotomy, and its complex relation to questions of epistemology and time.

Shadows transcend the border between ontological fields and allow for the emergence of meaning without an intentional subject. When purposefully used in art, our perceptive routines are shaken and we are forced to reconsider seemingly stable truths about the outside world.

Taking a closer look at three shadow-artists (Yamashita, Kagan, Gallagher), the talk delimits the range of an anthropology of shadows and proposes an unbiased reassessment of 'light's dark sibling'.