"Art": Again

Critical Inquiry 5 (4):713-723 (1979)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

So far my examples have illustrated purely descriptive and evaluative uses of "work of art," but my main claim is that most uses are not pure. Take a controversial example. Christo recently hung a huge, bright orange curtain between the sides of a canyon in Rifle Gap, Colorado. The curtain stretched all the way across the canyon, filled the canyon from top to bottom, and had a hole cut out for the road at the base of the canyon to pass through. There was a good deal of controversy in Colorado at the time about whether the curtain was a work of art. . . . First, the curtain was not in a traditional medium, and this alone was enough to disqualify it as a work of art for some people. Still, it was an artifact, it was intended for public observation and contemplation, and it had no essential utilitarian function. That it met these criteria there could be no doubt, and this was enough for some to consider it a work of art. Others, however, required more before deciding. Of those, some said that a great deal of skill was required to produce it; that it definitely had significant formal qualities—especially the dramatic contrast in line and color between it and the completely natural surroundings; that it was certainly a creative endeavor; and that it was most conducive to aesthetic experience—comparable to certain natural phenomena. For these people it was, without a doubt, a work of art for both descriptive and evaluative reasons. Others, however, were much less charitable. They thought that if the production required skill at all, it was engineering not artistic skill; that not only did it not have significant formal qualities, it was formally trivial and sterile; that perhaps it was novel, but to call it creative was beyond the pale; that far from being conducive to aesthetic experience, it was a blight upon the landscape. Therefore, it was not a work of art. Finally, there were those people who were not sure which characteristics to attribute to the Christo production and were therefore uncertain whether it was a work of art. Robert McGregor is an associate professor of philosophy at the University of Denver and is the author of several articles on aesthetics. See also: "Christo's Gates and Gilo's Wall" by W. J. T. Mitchell in Vol. 32, No. 4

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,867

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Opposing Science with Art, Again?Hans Seigfried - 1989 - International Studies in Philosophy 21 (2):105-111.
Possibility of the aesthetic experience.Michael H. Mitias (ed.) - 1986 - Norwell, MA, USA: Distributors for the U.S. and Canada, Kluwer Academic.
The End of Art - Again: Afterthoughts on the German Literaturstreit.Eva Geulen - 1993 - Telos: Critical Theory of the Contemporary 1993 (95):171-180.
The End of Art - Again: Afterthoughts on the German Literaturstreit.E. Geulen - 1993 - Telos: Critical Theory of the Contemporary 1993 (95):171-180.
Art and Imagination.H. Morris-Jones - 1959 - Philosophy 34 (130):204 - 216.
The Religious Dimension of Art and Aesthetic Experience.Johanna Liu - 1998 - Philosophy and Culture 25 (3):261-272.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-17

Downloads
17 (#863,839)

6 months
1 (#1,721,226)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references