Denying the Role of Interpretation in relation to philosophy and Art in Alain Badiou's Thought

In this article it would be tried to elaborate Alain Badiou’s novel view to the relationship between art and philosophy and furthermore to illustrate the role that “interpretation” plays in his novel view. Badiou believes his point of view toward this relationship to be the opposite of three visions which, to his eyes, have been the dominant views across western history of philosophy: didacticism, romanticism, and classicism. He thinks that in none of these three views the relationship between art and truth has ever been regarded as “singular” and “immanent”, that is to say, art has never been honored as the producer of a truth of its own. Badiou renders art such a status of having its own truth next to that of science, politics and love. This new relationship between art and truth brings about a new relationship between art and philosophy. In this new relationship, philosophy is neither art’s master nor its servant; it does not impose meaning on art from outside and its task is not to interpret or express the truths that art has reached to. According to Badiou, since artistic truth is restricted to art itself and since the truth is basically something contrary to extant meanings, therefore, philosophy cannot share or express through interpretation and illustration the truth that art produces. What philosophy does in relation to art is to draw a distinction between truths and doxas or “common beliefs”, and hence to declare the artistic truths.