Is it Possible to Define ‘Art’?

1643 Words4 Pages

The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power. The above quotation is the Oxford Dictionary’s definition of art. It is one of the many definitions and theories written in answer to the question “what is art?” However, that very question implies an inhibited and essentialist answer such as “Art is…” Throughout the centuries philosophers, critics and authors have attempted to edge us ever nearer to the evasive concept that is ‘art’. It is an incredibly difficult concept and practice to theorise and define, especially in the twentieth century, as it is the very essence of art, as with all creative practices, to constantly challenge what has gone before and its pre-conceived definitions. Leo Tolstoy states that: In order correctly to define art, it is necessary, first of all, to cease to consider it as a means to pleasure and to consider it as one of the conditions of human life. Viewing it in this way we cannot fail to observe that art is one of the means of intercourse between man and man. This is taken from his iconoclastic collection of essays and polemics on art called ‘What Is Art?’ In this impassioned and powerful work, Tolstoy criticised the elitist art society in the nineteenth century, and rejected the idea that the sole purpose of art should be the creation of something beautiful. This view alone goes against the vague definition of the Oxford Dictionary, and immediately we see the issues with defining art unfold. There are countless theories written by too many people for us to create one definition that is able to be applicable to all art, from all periods. H... ... middle of paper ... ...n and Significant Form’, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. 35, No. 4 (Summer, 1977), p.433 Bell, (London, 1913), p.83 McLaughlin, ‘Clive Bell’s Aesthetic: Tradition and Significant Form’, p.433 Burgin, (London, 1986), p.160 R. Wollheim, Painting as an Art, (Thames and Hudson, London, 1987), p.358 Sluga H., Family Resemblance, (Grazer Philosophische Studien, vol.71, 2006) L. Wittgenstein (tr. G. E. M. Anscombe), Philosophical Investigations 4th Edition, (Blackwell Publishing, West Sussex, 2009) Wittgenstein, (West Sussex, 2009), aphorisms 66-67 A. C. Danto, Beyond the Brillo Box: The Visual Arts in Post-Historical Perspective, (University of California Press, U.S.A, 1992), p.53 http://www.philosophypages.com/dy/n9.htm#nomi , 8th March, 2014 http://www.lrb.co.uk/v03/n06/peter-lamarque/works-of-art , Peter Lamarque, 9th March, 2014

More about Is it Possible to Define ‘Art’?

Open Document