By following the arguments between Coenraad J. Temminck and fellow ornithologists Louis J.-P. Vieillot and Nicholas Vigors, this paper sketches, to a degree, the state of zoological classification and nomenclature between 1825 and 1840 in Europe. The discussions revolved around the problems caused by an unstable nomenclature, the different definitions of genera and species and the best method to achieve a natural system of classification. As more and more naturalists concerned with classifying and arranging the groups of birds joined (...) these discussions, a broad platform for debate emerged around the 1840s that gave a major impulse to the disciplines of taxonomy and systematics. Natural history ceased to be dominated by a few influential scientific authorities and became the scientific field where debate preceded agreement and, with it, progress. With this ‘democratization’ of natural history, Temminck's status significantly changed between 1815 and 1840. After that year, his own views on classification along with certain economical and political developments in The Netherlands led Temminck to abandon the arena of ornithology and therefore, to lose his scientific authority. (shrink)

By following the arguments between Coenraad J. Temminck and fellow ornithologists Louis J.-P. Vieillot and Nicholas Vigors, this paper sketches, to a degree, the state of zoological classification and nomenclature between 1825 and 1840 in Europe. The discussions revolved around the problems caused by an unstable nomenclature, the different definitions of genera and species and the best method to achieve a natural system of classification. As more and more naturalists concerned with classifying and arranging the groups of birds joined (...) these discussions, a broad platform for debate emerged around the 1840s that gave a major impulse to the disciplines of taxonomy and systematics. Natural history ceased to be dominated by a few influential scientific authorities and became the scientific field where debate preceded agreement and, with it, progress. With this ‘democratization’ of natural history, Temminck’s status significantly changed between 1815 and 1840. After that year, his own views on classification along with certain economical and political developments in The Netherlands led Temminck to abandon the arena of ornithology and therefore, to lose his scientific authority. (shrink)

La catégorie du suranné, appliquée à l’objet esthétique, notamment au produit de l’activité artistique, désigne une mesure, un kairos, qui se situe entre l’ancien qui ne s’érige pas encore en classique et le contemporain qui n’est pas encore jugé démodé. Il qualifie tout objet esthétique en passe d’acquérir une valeur d’ancienneté sans pour autant s’affirmer comme universellement acceptable et sans s’imposer impérativement. Il ne détermine ni ce qui a vieilli ni ce que l’on qualifierait de vieillot; il dénote, plus (...) particulièrement, un état intermédiaire, plus ou moins officiellement reconnu, qu’il relie au présent. Dans cet ordre d’idées, le suranné implique pour la conscience esthétique un jeu dialectique entre ce qui est directement vécu et ce qui est poursuivi, avec, en plus, un rien de dédain, mais aussi avec un certain regret à son égard. Il équivaut à un présent rétentionnel dont on voudrait, mais ne pourrait, se détacher; d’où la nostalgie que la conscience esthétique éprouve pour lui. D’ordre éminemment transitoire, l’objet suranné est un objet esthétiquement intermédiaire qui s’identifie à une hystérésis formelle autant que fonctionnelle. Dès lors, le suranné assure une continuité esthétique, oriente la conscience vers le passé, actualise l’inactuel et cautionne le rapprochement de ce qui est sujet à distanciation. (shrink)