DOCSLIB.ORG

Art As Display

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 6-2016 Art as Display Frank M. Boardman Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/1222 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] ART AS DISPLAY by FRANK BOARDMAN A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Philosophy in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, The City University of New York 2016 © 2016 FRANK BOARDMAN All Rights Reserved ii ART AS DISPLAY by FRANK BOARDMAN This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in Philosophy in satisfaction of the dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Professor Noël Carroll_______________________ ______________ __________________________________________ Date Chair of Examining Committee Professor Iakovos Vasiliou____________________ ______________ __________________________________________ Date Executive Officer Professor Noël Carroll______________________________________ Professor Nickolas Pappas___________________________________ Professor Jonathan Gilmore__________________________________ Professor Jesse Prinz_______________________________________ Professor Peter Godfrey-Smith_______________________________ Supervisory Committee THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK iii Art as Display Abstract Art is essentially a type of display. As an activity, art is what we do when we display objects with certain intentions. As a set of objects, art is all of those things that are displayed for those purposes. The artworld is the social atmosphere that surrounds this particular activity of display. And a history of art is an evolving narrative of change in the practice of this sort of display. Specifically, to focus for convenience on art as a set of objects, this is what we can call the “displayed-object thesis”: x is a work of art iff: (a) x is presented to a public audience for the purpose of their appreciation or contemplation of x and (b) a proper understanding of x requires recognition of (a). This dissertation is an attempt to articulate, explain and justify the displayed-object thesis. At the moment, there is probably an air of temerity about offering another definitional theory, much less an essential one. The last fifty or so years have seen less disagreement about the (dis)value of such an ambition than about the reasons for it’s retrograde status. In the first few chapters, then, I offer a number of defenses of the project itself against claims that a successful essential definition is impossible, improbable, or redundant. I then turn to the displayed-object thesis itself, explaining and arguing for its key components as well as responding to objections to it. In the final chapters, I turn our attention forward, toward certain practical and theoretical benefits of the theory. iv Acknowledgements Were I to try to thank everyone who had some part in helping me formulate, craft or complete this dissertation, I would undoubtedly leave out half the deserving. But there are many without whom this thing would not be possible - I leave it to them to decide if this is praise or blame. So I’ll adopt these criteria: the following people have knowingly played a significant role in the creation of this dissertation (or at least its content), this dissertation would be substantially different were it not for their involvement, and it is better for their contributions. Noël Carroll has been with this project since its beginning, providing more excellent advice, suggestions, objections, help and inspiration than I can name or even recall. Nick Pappas too has played a significant part in making each part of this dissertation better. I can’t thank them enough for all of their time, patience, kindness, attention and skill. Jesse Prinz, Iakovos Vasiliou, Peter Godfrey-Smith, and Alan Hausman have all made invaluable comments and criticisms on the dissertation in one form or another. A few arguments I make here have appeared or been delivered elsewhere, and I thank the editors and anonymous reviewers as well as the organizers and commenters at those journals and conferences. None of this would be possible without all sorts of help from my wife Samantha – most notably long meandering conversations wherein a number of the central ideas of this dissertation were worked out. And finally thanks to my daughter Eleanor, for reminding me of the pleasure, amazement and joy art can produce as well as the (sometimes pressing) need to find and figure out – all of which constitute the only decent motivations for this whole endeavor. v Table of Contents Chapter One: Introduction 1 Confessing and wagering 1 Why a philosophy of art? 2 Plan of the dissertation 5 Chapter Two: Challenges to the Definitional Project 8 A successful definition of “art” is impossible 9 A successful (essential) definition of “art” is improbable 28 We don’t know what we want from a definition of “art” 31 Chapter Three: Prior Definitional Theories 38 Representational (mimetic) theories 38 Art as the beautiful or revelatory 39 Expresssivist theories 46 Art as language 48 Aesthetic theories 54 Institutional theories 61 Historical theories 65 Alternative-structure theories 73 Chapter Four: Art as Display, Art as Displayed Object 83 Motivation 84 Articulating the theory 103 Chapter Five: The Case for the Theory 114 Meeting skeptical challenges 114 Preserving advantages over prior theories 119 Satisfying the proper criteria 125 Chapter Six: The Displayed Object In… 140 Plastic arts 141 Performing arts 146 Film and photography 150 Literary arts 152 Architecture, furniture, and design 153 Anticipating the avant-garde 155 The value of displayed objects to art research 159 Chapter Seven: Art, Display, and Evaluation 167 Wollheim’s “Art and Evaluation” 168 Aesthetic and artistic value 169 Identifying the proper object of aesthetic evaluation 175 The justification of aesthetic judgments: four options 181 Objections 184 Another type of aesthetic relativism 193 Conclusion: Where We Are, Why I Brought Us Here 197 A very fast look behind 197 A very fast personal history: art 198 A very fast personal history: the philosophy of art 199 A very fast look ahead 200 Bibliography 202 vi Chapter One: Introduction I. Confessing and wagering Let’s begin in the middle, work our way back to it, and see where we can go from there. This is a definition of art, and the one I think is correct: x is a work of art iff: (a) x is presented to a public audience for the purpose of their appreciation or contemplation of x and (b) a proper understanding of x requires recognition of (a). There is a kind of confessional relief in having that out and in the open, in there being no secrets between us. It feels like a good confession because it sounds absurd once it’s said. What right do I have, after so many others’ failed attempts to define art and so many attempts to show that we cannot define art, to offer one more? None, except that I think it is the right one. And if there’s some hubris in offering such a theory, there’s something Quixotic about trying to convince you that it’s the right one. But I’m going to do that too. A lot has to happen between now and then. I’m going to have to argue that a definitional theory of art is possible, that we don’t have the right one yet, that this one is explainable and plausible, that there is at least one good justification for it, and that we can do something useful with it. We’ll have to see, of course, about the logical and truthful quality of these arguments - but at least these qualities have soundness as a clear and obvious (if likely unattainable) standard. I want the arguments to be not just sound but convincing as well, and rhetorical success does not have such a clear standard. So what will count as a victory for me? As at the track, “winning” is relative to the wager. On the win ticket, I convince you that the definition above uniquely captures necessary 1 and sufficient conditions for art status, and also that this is a valuable thing to know. No other theory succeeds in this way. On the place ticket, I win or you’re convinced that the theory provides a valuable contribution to an evolving conversation about what constitutes art status. Some other theories do this. On the show ticket, I win, place, or you’re convinced that the theory brings to light certain under-appreciated features of art, and that doing so is valuable. More theories do this. A placing or strong showing would be enough to warrant our efforts and time. But a horse shows by trying to win, so let’s aim for a win. II. Why a philosophy of art? We will come to the question of whether or not a definitional theory of art specifically can be warranted or useful.1 But there may be two forms of resistance to any philosophy of art, to engaging with art philosophically. The first form asks why we should philosophize about art as opposed to other things? I get the sense, for instance, that it is often assumed that there is an extra burden on the aesthetic theorist to justify himself even above that which falls on all philosophers. Perhaps the kind of “dreariness” J.A. Passmore ascribed to many theories of art criticism is thought to infect all of aesthetics. Passmore’s concern, though, was explicitly with those theories that expressed a certain “wooliness” of thought, especially that they “fail to reveal with any sharpness the characteristics of [their] subject matter.”2 It sounds as though a rigorous attempt at a philosophically illuminating theory of art is just what was needed in 1951.
Recommended publications
  • Art Dissolves – the Afterlife

    Art Dissolves – the Afterlife

    ART DISSOLVES – THE AFTERLIFE ART IS NOT FOREVER If humans lived average life spans of 1,000 years we would look at the history of art differently. The long ago would be longer ago. The memories of our childhood would expand to include remnants of the Dark Ages, the Renaissance, and the Kandinsky of 100 years ago would merely be a kid…his painterly scrawling perhaps still considered youthful exuberance and experimentation. On the other end of real life spans, we know of creatures on Earth that live mere minutes, days or weeks. Mayflies are emblematic of ephemeral beings…and our pet dogs and cats die all too quickly. We outlive them by many decades. If these animals made art objects during their short life spans, what would “they” think of it in comparison of it to the human ability to create and enjoy art for 80 or 90 years? What if Bowser could create a painting at age two, his teen years? And what if a Mayfly that expired the day after its birth could create a sculpture in the third hour of its life? Would it consider its artful effort important though it existed for a mere few hours? Would we? Would we look upon their art objects as “less meaningful” because those objects endured so briefly compared to our own more lengthy lives? And as humans who are art interested, perhaps even connoisseurs, what do we now think of human made art that exists in a physical state but briefly…art that is allowed to blow away in the wind, washed down a stream, erected for days or weeks and then dismantled? Is the fine art object that has a life span of 10 years less significant than one that endures for 100…or 1,000? Of course, part of our consideration in this regard has to do with our own memory.
  • A Chameleon Called Musical Time: Some Observations About Time and Musical Time

    A Chameleon Called Musical Time: Some Observations About Time and Musical Time

    A chameleon called musical time: Some observations about time and musical time Thomas Reiner In The Magic Mountain, Thomas Mann asks begin but merely starts. It does not build to a about the possibility of narrating time and gives an climax, does not purposefully set up internal example from music as part of his answer: expectations, does not seek to fulfill any expec- tations that might arise accidentally, does not Can one tell-that is to say, narrate-time, time build or release tension, and does not end but itself, as such, for its own sake? That would simply ceases.' surely be an absurd undertaking. A story which read: 'Time passed, it ran on, the time flowed Elaborating on the feeling of timelessness, onward' and so forth-no one in his senses Kramer states that it could consider that a narrative. It would be as though one held a single note or chord for a can be aroused not only by music but also whole hour, and called it music.' through other artforms, certain mental illnesses, dreams, unconscious mental processes, drugs, A single harmony is sustained for approximately and religious rituals. Vertical music does not 70 minutes in Stimmung, a work which Karlheinz create its own temporality but rather makes Stockhausen wrote in 1968. The work's title has contact with a deeply human time sense that is oflen denied in daily living (at least in Western several meanings and could be translated as tun- cultures). The significance of vertical composi- ing, intonation, atmosphere, or mood. The vocal- lions, and of many modernist anworks, is that ists in this composition sing the second, third, they give voice to a fundamental human experi- fourth, fifth, seventh, and riinth overtones of the ence that is largely unavailable in traditional fundamental note B flat.
  • 06 Thomas M. Robinson.P65

    06 Thomas M. Robinson.P65

    83 Thomas M. Robinson FIVE WORKS OF ART IN PLATO THOMAS M. ROBINSON Resumo: Se é possível dizer que há uma teoria da Arte em Platão, ela está relacionada à reflexão do filósofo sobre a Alma do Mundo e a Alma do Homem, seja no Timeu, na República, no Fédon ou Leis. Pretendo discutir outros aspectos desta questão atualizando o paralelismo existente entre a demiurgia da Alma do Mundo como objeto-arte e a pólis ideal como objeto-arte ambos fabricados por um intelecto que contempla o Bem. Abstract: If it is possible to say that there is a theory of Art in Plato, it is related to the reflexion of the philosopher about the World Soul and Man’s Soul, whether in the Timaeus, in Republic, Phaedon or Laws. I intend to discurs other aspects of this issues studyng the existing parallelism between the demiurges of the world soul and the ideal pólis as art-object both fashioned by an intellect that contemplates Good. Palavras-chave: arte, mimética, demiurgia, alma art, mimetic, demiurgy, soul If there is one thing that most readers of Plato (and for that matter several who have never in fact read a word of him) think they know, it is that he had a very jaundiced view of the fine arts, and as evidence they point triumphantly to large sections of two dialogues in particular, the Republic and the Laws. Not only, they add, is his view jaundiced, he even backs it with theory, and a preposterous, theory at that, in which he claims that all that passes for art appeals to the very lowest possible part of our soul, the so-called epithymetikón, and that, as far as its ontic content goes, it lies (inclusively) a full three moves away from the truly real, a shadow of a shadow of the Forms.
  • These Aesthetics Are Not New

    These Aesthetics Are Not New

    These Aesthetics Are Not New Post-Internet conditions and their effect on contemporary ideas of representation in Painting. By Callan Grecia Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for Master of Fine Art at Rhodes University February 2017 Practical Supervisor: Ms. Tanya Poole Thesis Supervisor: Ms. Rat Western Abstract These Aesthetics Are Not New draws inspiration from the effect of digital technological progress on a consumer society. The Internet as a source of ubiquitous imagery reaffirms the idea that in a Post-Internet age there is nothing new, only conditions affected by a networked way of life. In this thesis I attempt to question contemporary ideas of representation and art making, specifically within the medium of oil paint, in a digitally consumed culture of instantaneous access. I interrogate the repetitive imagery that pervades our online experiences, and I speak about how I use my grasp of painterly knowledge and lexicon to replicate digital conditions in the real world to further cement my position that contemporary aesthetics, (digital, physical or both) are not new. I first introduce the reader to the idea of the Post-Internet, exploring the digital’s encroachment on our physical spaces and it’s relation to the politics of the medium of Oil Paint. I then address the concept of the Image-Object, and unpack this idea by comparing and contrasting emoji’s in relation to gestural mark making and the ascription of meaning through iconographic methods in Oil Painting. This culminates in an analysis of my physical practice in relation to these ideas, and concludes with my observations on the future of our ways of seeing, as affected by the Internet and technological progression.
  • On the Epistemological Significance of Aesthetic Values in Architectural Theory

    On the Epistemological Significance of Aesthetic Values in Architectural Theory

    On the Epistemological Significance of Aesthetic Values in Architectural Theory by Ritu Bhatt Master of Architecture (1993) Kansas State University Bachelor of Architecture (1990) University of Roorkee, India Submitted to the Department of Architecture in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Architecture: History and Theory of Architecture at the T yTT Massachusetts Institute of Technology January, 2000 @ 2000 Ritu Bhatt. All rights reserved The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part. Signature of Author...................................................................... Department of Architecture January 7, 2000 C ertified b . ... .................... .. tanrord A son ark Jarzo Professor of History and Assoc. Pro essor of History and Architecture Architecture Thesis Co- Supervisor Thesis Co- Supervisor Accepted by................................. V ... - ........ Stanford Anderson Chairman, Department Committee on Graduate Students Thesis Readers Professor Stanford Anderson Professor of History and Architecture Head, Department of Architecture, MIT Professor Mark Jarzombek Associate Professor of History and Architecture, MIT Professor Sibel Bozdogan Adjunct Professor, Graduate School of Design, Harvard University Professor Diane Ghirardo Professor of Architecture, University of Southern California Professor Satya P. Mohanty Professor of English, Cornell University Professor Catherine
  • Conceptual Art: a Critical Anthology

    Conceptual Art: a Critical Anthology

    Conceptual Art: A Critical Anthology Alexander Alberro Blake Stimson, Editors The MIT Press conceptual art conceptual art: a critical anthology edited by alexander alberro and blake stimson the MIT press • cambridge, massachusetts • london, england ᭧1999 Massachusetts Institute of Technology All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval)without permission in writing from the publisher. This book was set in Adobe Garamond and Trade Gothic by Graphic Composition, Inc. and was printed and bound in the United States of America. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Conceptual art : a critical anthology / edited by Alexander Alberro and Blake Stimson. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-262-01173-5 (hc : alk. paper) 1. Conceptual art. I. Alberro, Alexander. II. Stimson, Blake. N6494.C63C597 1999 700—dc21 98-52388 CIP contents ILLUSTRATIONS xii PREFACE xiv Alexander Alberro, Reconsidering Conceptual Art, 1966–1977 xvi Blake Stimson, The Promise of Conceptual Art xxxviii I 1966–1967 Eduardo Costa, Rau´ l Escari, Roberto Jacoby, A Media Art (Manifesto) 2 Christine Kozlov, Compositions for Audio Structures 6 He´lio Oiticica, Position and Program 8 Sol LeWitt, Paragraphs on Conceptual Art 12 Sigmund Bode, Excerpt from Placement as Language (1928) 18 Mel Bochner, The Serial Attitude 22 Daniel Buren, Olivier Mosset, Michel Parmentier, Niele Toroni, Statement 28 Michel Claura, Buren, Mosset, Toroni or Anybody 30 Michael Baldwin, Remarks on Air-Conditioning: An Extravaganza of Blandness 32 Adrian Piper, A Defense of the “Conceptual” Process in Art 36 He´lio Oiticica, General Scheme of the New Objectivity 40 II 1968 Lucy R.
  • A Critique of Nelson Goodman's Aesthetics: Music As Process

    A Critique of Nelson Goodman's Aesthetics: Music As Process

    PANDION: The Osprey Journal of Research & Ideas Volume 1 Number 1 Article 6 2020 A Critique of Nelson Goodman’s Aesthetics: Music As Process William S. Gilbert University of North Florida, [email protected] Faculty Mentor: Sarah Mattice, PhD, Associate Professor Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies This paper was a co-winner of the Philosophy Program's 2019-2020 Paper Prize. Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/pandion_unf Part of the Comparative Philosophy Commons, and the Esthetics Commons Recommended Citation Gilbert, William S. (2020) "A Critique of Nelson Goodman’s Aesthetics: Music As Process," PANDION: The Osprey Journal of Research and Ideas: Vol. 1 : No. 1 , Article 6. Available at: https://digitalcommons.unf.edu/pandion_unf/vol1/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Scholarship at UNF Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in PANDION: The Osprey Journal of Research & Ideas by an authorized administrator of UNF Digital Commons. For more information, please contact Digital Projects. © 2020 All Rights Reserved A Critique of Nelson Goodman’s Aesthetics: Music As Process Cover Page Footnote The advice and mentorship offered by Dr. Sarah Mattice was absolutely critical in not only the essays development but also my development as a student and thinker. Her feedback and generosity with time in meetings is something I am deeply grateful for. Dr. Jean Miller of Virginia Tech is also responsible for highly valuable suggestions for a much needed revision. I am very grateful for her advice. Finally I would like to thank Jason Simpson of the UNF Writing Center.
  • MAURICE MERLEAU-PONTY Translated by Forrest Williams

    MAURICE MERLEAU-PONTY Translated by Forrest Williams

    Study Project on the Nature of Perception (1933) The Nature of Perception (1934) MAURICE MERLEAU-PONTY Translated by Forrest Williams Translator's Preface On April 8, 1933, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, who was then teaching at a lycée in Beauvais, applied to the Caisse National des Sciences for a subvention, which he received, to undertake a project of study on the nature of perception. In 1934, he requested a renewal, and submitted an account, which he titled 'The Nature of Perception," of what he had already accomplished and of what he proposed to do next. The renewal request was not granted. Apart from three book reviews and some remarks made at a philosophy conference, La Structure du Comportement, which was completed in 1938 and published in 1942, is generally considered the first evidence of Merleau-Ponty's major philosophical concerns. In a sense, that is so. However, the two earlier texts translated below, relatively short and schematic though they are, may never the less be of interest to students of Merleau-Ponty's philosophy. As can be shown, I think, by a brief analysis of their contents, Merleau-Ponty had ar- ticulated fairly clearly, some four years before the completion of Structure, a number of motifs that proved to be fundamental throughout his intellectual career. Naturally, his ideas were to expand and develop from 1933 to the drafts for Le Visible et l' invisible on 1 2 which he was working at the time of his death in 1961. Therefore, it is also interesting to notice themes of his later work that were not en- visaged at the outset.
  • Nelson Goodman's Arguments Against Perspective: a Geometrical

    Nelson Goodman's Arguments Against Perspective: a Geometrical

    Branko Mitroviü Research Department of Architecture Nelson Goodman’s Arguments Against Unitec Institute of Technology Carrington Rd., Mt Albert Perspective: A Geometrical Analysis Auckland, NEW ZEALAND Presented at Nexus 2012: Relationships Between Architecture [email protected] and Mathematics, Milan, 11-14 June 2012 Keywords: Nelson Goodman, Abstract. Nelson Goodman’s highly influential book perspective theory, geometry of Languages of Art argued that that all visual experience is perspective, Ernst Gombrich, merely a cultural construct. In presenting his thesis Goodman Erwin Panofsky relied on a series of geometrical arguments intended to show that the geometrical construction of perspective does not rely on the geometry of light rays. In this article I analyze the geometrical validity of Goodman's arguments. Introduction For the past fifty years few books by English-speaking philosophers have exercised a greater influence on art- and architectural history than Nelson Goodman’s Languages of Art [1968]. This book was an important contribution to the rise of cultural relativism that subsequently came to dominate the English-speaking humanities for decades. Goodman adopted the view (previously advocated by Ernst Gombrich in his book Art and Illusion [1960]) that “there is no innocent eye” and that the totality of an individual’s perception is predetermined by and a result of that person’s conceptual framework.1 Unlike Gombrich, however, Goodman inferred that, since our conceptual frameworks derive from the cultures we live in, all we can know and perceive is a result of our cultural background; he consequently argued that reality itself was but a cultural construct.2 According to this view, there are no facts that constitute the world independent of human cognitive apparatus.
  • How to Benacerraf a Goodman-Lewis

    How to Benacerraf a Goodman-Lewis

    How to Benacerraf a Goodman-Lewis This paper offers a limited defense of the thesis Nelson Goodman labels “nominalism,” according to which there are no distinct entities constructed from the same basic entities. Goodmanian nominalism-- “gnominalism,” for short—bears an uncertain relation to more familiar nominalist theses, but, according to Goodman, anti-gnominalism is simply “incomprehensible.” Unfortunately, as many commentators have noted, Goodman offers frustratingly little in the way of arguments for gnominalism. The present reassessment of gnominalism argues that Goodman is right to claim that theories violating gnominalism incur a distinctive theoretical vice. At the same time, the glaring lack of arguments for gnominalism indicate that something has gone badly wrong. Roughly speaking, Goodman’s support for gnominalism mistakes the symptom for the disease. This is because the vice of anti-gnominalist theories is that they are uniformly susceptible to variations on the Non-Uniqueness Problem that Paul Benacerraf presents for set- theoretic reductions. Gnominalism can therefore be motivated as a response to the Non-Uniqueness Problem. For this reason, would-be gnominalists like David Lewis are best served to argue against contested posits by showing these posits to yield Non-Uniqueness Problems given the existence of distinct entities constructed from the basic entities. To this end, after explaining gnominalism and its connection to the Non-Uniqueness Problem, I discuss how Lewis’ version of gnominalism departs from Goodman’s own. I then argue that a Non-Uniqueness Problem arises for those who posit structural universals—the leading target of Lewis’ gnominalism. (Word Count: 4284) §1. Introduction Two conceptions of nominalism are commonly distinguished when discussing debates between nominalists and platonists.1 The first kind of nominalism denies the existence of universals and holds, instead, that all entities are particulars rather than general entities like universals.
  • Confluences Between Art and Sport

    Confluences Between Art and Sport

    Advances in Physical Education, 2019, 9, 87-102 http://www.scirp.org/journal/ape ISSN Online: 2164-0408 ISSN Print: 2164-0386 Confluences between Art and Sport Danny Shorkend WIZO School of Design, Haifa, Israel How to cite this paper: Shorkend, D. Abstract (2019). Confluences between Art and Sport. Advances in Physical Education, 9, 87-102. In this article, I present various ways of looking at sport through the lens of https://doi.org/10.4236/ape.2019.92007 art-aesthetic concepts. It is argued that indeed there are overlaps between art and sport and that this suggests a complementary pairing between the two Received: February 22, 2019 Accepted: March 19, 2019 that in turn sets in motion other such pairings, such as that between the aes- Published: March 22, 2019 thetic and the extra-aesthetic. In short: art and sport are both games within a certain defined cultural setting, but also interlink. I then conclude that since Copyright © 2019 by author(s) and there are theoretical links, there may be practical implications. Scientific Research Publishing Inc. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International Keywords License (CC BY 4.0). Art, Sport, Movement, Physicality, Aesthetic, Games http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access 1. Introduction When a painter paints, there are obviously different methods, but the common fact of the matter is a movement of some sort. Some movements may be more vigorous and gestural, others more subtle and careful. But what motivates the stroke? How is it that a certain style may evolve? If the painter moves the way he/she does, he/she expresses an emotional, intellectual or primitive impulse, and then the stroke contains such energy.
  • Final Thesis

    Final Thesis

    A DEFENSE OF AESTHETIC ANTIESSENTIALISM: MORRIS WEITZ AND THE POSSIBLITY OF DEFINING ‘ART’ _____________________________ A Thesis Presented to The Honors Tutorial College Ohio University _____________________________ In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for Graduation from the Honors Tutorial College with the degree of Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy and Art History _____________________________ By Jordan Mills Pleasant June, 2010 ii This thesis has been approved by The Honors Tutorial College and the Department of Philosophy ___________________________ Dr. Arthur Zucker Chair, Department of Philosophy Thesis Advisor ___________________________ Dr. Scott Carson Honors Tutorial College, Director of Studies Philosophy ___________________________ Jeremy Webster Dean, Honors Tutorial College iii This thesis has been approved by The Honors Tutorial College and the Department of Art History ___________________________ Dr. Jennie Klein Chair, Department of Art History Thesis Advisor ___________________________ Dr. Jennie Klein Honors Tutorial College, Director of Studies Art History ___________________________ Jeremy Webster Dean, Honors Tutorial College iv Dedicated to Professor Arthur Zucker, without whom this work would have been impossible. v Table Of Contents Thesis Approval Pages Page ii Introduction: A Brief History of the Role of Definitions in Art Page 1 Chapter I: Morris Weitz’s “The Role of Theory in Aesthetics” Page 8 Chapter II: Lewis K. Zerby’s “A Reconsideration of the Role of the Theory in Aesthetics. A Reply to Morris Weitz”