The Aesthetic Appreciation of Art. Philosophical Reconsiderations of the Relationship Between Art and Beauty Supported by Case Studies
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Aesthetic Appreciation of Art. Philosophical Reconsiderations of the Relationship Between Art and Beauty Supported by Case Studies. Inauguraldissertation der Philosophisch-historischen Fakultät der Universität Bern zur Erlangung der Doktorwürde vorgelegt von Chiara Guarda Isorno (Tessin) (Im Selbstverlag, Bern 2005) Von der Philosophisch-historischen Fakultät auf Antrag von Prof. Dr. Gerhard Seel und Prof. Dr. Robert Hopkins angenommen. Bern, den 15. April 2005 Der Dekan: Prof. Dr. Reinhard Schulze Table of Content Acknowledgments...................................................................................................5 General Introduction .............................................................................................6 Part I.............................................................................................................................12 Two Famous Examples of Anesthetic Approaches To Art .....................................12 Part I, Chapter 1..................................................................................................13 Contextualizing Danto and Dickie (Introduction to Part I) .....................................13 I.1.1. From Aesthetics To Philosophy of Art.......................................................13 I.1.2. Art-Philosophical Discourse in the 1950s-1960s .......................................17 Part I, Chapter 2..................................................................................................22 Arthur C. Danto and the Indiscernibles ...................................................................22 I.2.1. Looking For a Real Definition of Art.........................................................22 I.2.2. The End of Art History...............................................................................27 I.2.3. Assessing Danto’s Definition of Art ..........................................................33 Part I, Chapter 3..................................................................................................35 George Dickie and the Institutional Theory of Art..................................................35 I.3.1. The Earlier Version of the ITA...................................................................35 I.3.2. The Later Version of the ITA.....................................................................39 I.3.3. Assessing the ITA.......................................................................................45 Part II ...........................................................................................................................47 Regaining the Aesthetic Dimension of Art..............................................................47 Part II, Chapter 1.................................................................................................48 The Fine Arts and the Goal of Aesthetic Appreciation (Introduction To Part II)....48 Part II, Chapter 2.................................................................................................50 A Theory of Aesthetic Appreciation........................................................................50 II.2.1. Internal Aesthetic Properties .....................................................................51 II.2.2. External Aesthetic Properties....................................................................55 II.2.3. Meta-Aesthetic Properties.........................................................................65 II.2.4. Changing One’s Own Sensibility..............................................................68 II.2.5. Final Considerations..................................................................................71 Part II, Chapter 3.................................................................................................73 The Aesthetic Game of Art......................................................................................73 II.3.1. The Safety Area.........................................................................................73 II.3.2. Ontologically Constitutive Aesthetic Norms ............................................76 II.3.3. Towards a Functional Definition of Art....................................................81 II.3.4. Seeking the Link To the Art Historical Discourse ....................................85 II.3.5. The Invention of Art..................................................................................89 II.3.6. Final Considerations..................................................................................95 Part III ..........................................................................................................................98 Case Studies.............................................................................................................98 Part III, Chapter 1 ...............................................................................................99 On the Artist’s Dialogue with Art History: Caspar David Friedrich and the Ramdohr Quarrel .....................................................................................................99 III.1.1. The Case...................................................................................................99 III.1.2. Caspar David Friedrich..........................................................................107 III.1.3. Friedrich’s Goal .....................................................................................110 III.1.4. Friedrich’s Abstractions.........................................................................118 III.1.5. Friedrich Seeking the Link to Art History .............................................124 III.1.6. Final Considerations ..............................................................................127 Part III, Chapter 2 .............................................................................................128 On Aesthetic Properties, Indiscernibles, and Conceptual Art: The Richard Mutt Case........................................................................................................................128 III.2.1. The Richard Mutt Case ..........................................................................129 III.2.2. Duchamp’s Ironical Look at the Fine Arts ............................................134 III.2.3. Richard Mutt’s Fountain and Marcel Duchamp’s Fountains................140 III.2.4. On Visual Art That Does Not Need to Be Perceived.............................148 III.2.5. Final Considerations ..............................................................................153 Conclusion .........................................................................................................154 References..........................................................................................................156 Acknowledgments This work has benefited from my interaction with many people. Here, I would like to thank those who most directly helped me improve its quality. First and foremost, I would like to thank my advisor, Professor Gerhard Seel, who patiently discussed with me my theses over and over again, making me see many an obscure point in my argumentation. Thanks to his enthusiasm and engagement in the philosophy of art, the Philosophy Department of the University of Bern organizes an aesthetic colloquium each semester, from which I also benefited extremely. I would like to thank in particular two of the participants at the colloquium who gave me important ideas to improve the quality of my work: Daniel Scheidegger and Peter Meyer. Among the other people at the Philosophy Department, I would like to thank especially and with deep gratitude Reto Givel, a colleague and friend who spent hours commenting and discussing my theses, giving me an impressive amount of extremely precious feedback. I met Alfonso Ottobre (Università la Sapienza, Rom) at the 2004 conference organized by the Italian Society of Analytical Philosophy (SIFA) in Genoa. Discussions with him have been crucial for the development of my thoughts on aesthetic properties. I wish to thank him as well as Professor Chris Belshaw (Open University) and Cristina Carestiato (Sheffield University), whom I also met at the SIFA conference. They all read earlier versions of Part II and commented on them in very enriching ways, forcing me to rethink several aspects of my theory. At the SIFA conference I also met Professor Robert Hopkins (Sheffield University), who not only leveled important objections against the theses I presented in Genoa, and not only opened up to me some intriguing problems regarding aesthetic judgments such as the phenomenon of failure of testimony, but also consented to become my co-advisor. I wish to thank him very much. Last but not least, I would like to thank Lara Ruffolo, who patiently and efficiently went over my English text to correct all the mistakes I left in it. Without the help of all these people, my work would not have reached its current state. They are, of course, responsible only for the improvements that my work has known: the defects and weaknesses that it still contains are entirely mine. This work has been supported by the Swiss National Science Foundation in the framework of the project Regelsysteme als Voraussetzung künstlerischer Bedeutung. 5 General Introduction For many centuries now, philosophers have been concerned with artworks, i.e. with objects such as Michelangelo’s David or James Joyce’s Ulysses. Even though we readily associate these sorts of objects with the concept of art, it is important