Quasi-objects, Cult Objects and Fashion Objects: On two Kinds of Fetishism on Display in Modern Culture

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Standard

Quasi-objects, Cult Objects and Fashion Objects : On two Kinds of Fetishism on Display in Modern Culture. / Andersen, Bjørn Schiermer.

I: Theory, Culture & Society, Bind 28, Nr. 1, 2011, s. 81-102.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Harvard

Andersen, BS 2011, 'Quasi-objects, Cult Objects and Fashion Objects: On two Kinds of Fetishism on Display in Modern Culture', Theory, Culture & Society, bind 28, nr. 1, s. 81-102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276410374632

APA

Andersen, B. S. (2011). Quasi-objects, Cult Objects and Fashion Objects: On two Kinds of Fetishism on Display in Modern Culture. Theory, Culture & Society, 28(1), 81-102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276410374632

Vancouver

Andersen BS. Quasi-objects, Cult Objects and Fashion Objects: On two Kinds of Fetishism on Display in Modern Culture. Theory, Culture & Society. 2011;28(1):81-102. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276410374632

Author

Andersen, Bjørn Schiermer. / Quasi-objects, Cult Objects and Fashion Objects : On two Kinds of Fetishism on Display in Modern Culture. I: Theory, Culture & Society. 2011 ; Bind 28, Nr. 1. s. 81-102.

Bibtex

@article{fe1dacf9c0b24159b3be720d4339d43b,
title = "Quasi-objects, Cult Objects and Fashion Objects: On two Kinds of Fetishism on Display in Modern Culture",
abstract = "This article attempts to rehabilitate the concept of fetishism and to contributeto the debate on the social role of objects as well as to fashion theory.Extrapolating from Michel Serres{\textquoteright} theory of the quasi-objects, I distinguishtwo phenomenologies possessing almost opposite characteristics. These twophenomenologies are, so I argue, essential to quasi-object theory, yet largelyignored by Serres{\textquoteright} sociological interpreters. They correspond with the twodifferent theories of fetishism found in Marx and Durkheim, respectively.In the second half of the article, I introduce the fashion object as a uniqueopportunity for studying the interchange between these two forms offetishism and their respective phenomenologies. Finally, returning toSerres, I briefly consider the theoretical consequences of introducing thefashion object as a quasi-object.",
author = "Andersen, {Bj{\o}rn Schiermer}",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1177/0263276410374632",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
pages = "81--102",
journal = "Theory, Culture and Society",
issn = "0263-2764",
publisher = "Sage Journals",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quasi-objects, Cult Objects and Fashion Objects

T2 - On two Kinds of Fetishism on Display in Modern Culture

AU - Andersen, Bjørn Schiermer

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - This article attempts to rehabilitate the concept of fetishism and to contributeto the debate on the social role of objects as well as to fashion theory.Extrapolating from Michel Serres’ theory of the quasi-objects, I distinguishtwo phenomenologies possessing almost opposite characteristics. These twophenomenologies are, so I argue, essential to quasi-object theory, yet largelyignored by Serres’ sociological interpreters. They correspond with the twodifferent theories of fetishism found in Marx and Durkheim, respectively.In the second half of the article, I introduce the fashion object as a uniqueopportunity for studying the interchange between these two forms offetishism and their respective phenomenologies. Finally, returning toSerres, I briefly consider the theoretical consequences of introducing thefashion object as a quasi-object.

AB - This article attempts to rehabilitate the concept of fetishism and to contributeto the debate on the social role of objects as well as to fashion theory.Extrapolating from Michel Serres’ theory of the quasi-objects, I distinguishtwo phenomenologies possessing almost opposite characteristics. These twophenomenologies are, so I argue, essential to quasi-object theory, yet largelyignored by Serres’ sociological interpreters. They correspond with the twodifferent theories of fetishism found in Marx and Durkheim, respectively.In the second half of the article, I introduce the fashion object as a uniqueopportunity for studying the interchange between these two forms offetishism and their respective phenomenologies. Finally, returning toSerres, I briefly consider the theoretical consequences of introducing thefashion object as a quasi-object.

U2 - 10.1177/0263276410374632

DO - 10.1177/0263276410374632

M3 - Journal article

VL - 28

SP - 81

EP - 102

JO - Theory, Culture and Society

JF - Theory, Culture and Society

SN - 0263-2764

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 33251042