A Mapping Sentence Account of Non-traditional Three-Dimensional Art

  • Paul M. W. HackettEmail author
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Philosophy book series (BRIEFSPHILOSOPH)


In chapter three I present an augmentation to existing models of visual perception that have been developed to account for the perception and understanding of the experience of three-dimensional fine art. The chapter begins with a reflection upon how the model I propose draws upon the scholarship of Crowther (2007) in conjunction a modification of the mapping sentence approach used as a qualitative or philosophical research approach (Hackett 2014, 2016a, b). I delve into mapping sentences and I use these organizational templates to elucidate the writing of Rosalind Krauss by modelling how she has considered two-dimensional (Krauss 1986) and three-dimensional (Krauss 1979) modern abstract art. In facet theory research mapping sentences are frequently used either alone or in initial stages of research into a content domain using smallest space analysis (SSA) and to guide interpretation of later partial order scalogram analysis (POSA). In earlier publications I have put forward the mapping sentence as a structural template for understanding two-dimensional art (Hackett 2016b) and in this chapter I offer a modified version of this mapping sentence to account for the experience of three-dimensional abstract art.


Visual perception Facet theory Mapping sentence Paul Crowther Abstract art Art experience Art SSA POSA 


  1. Crowther P (2007) Defining art, creating the canon: artistic value in an era of doubt. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Hackett PMW (2014) Facet theory and the mapping sentence: evolving philosophy, use and application. Palgrave, BasingstokeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Hackett PMW (2016a) Facet theory and the mapping sentence as hermeneutically consistent structured meta-ontology and structured meta-mereology. Front Psychol: Philos Theor Psychol 7:471. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00471 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Hackett PMW (2016b) Psychology and philosophy of abstract art: neuro-aesthetics, perception and comprehension. Palgrave, BasingstokeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Krauss R (1979) Sculpture in the expanded field. October 8:30–44Google Scholar
  6. Krauss R (1986) The originality of the avant-garde and other modernist myths. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  7. Lowe EG (2007) The four-category ontology: a metaphysical foundation for natural science. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of CommunicationEmerson CollegeBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations