Introduction
« Art always has been and always will be important to humans » (p.xxi)1 says
Cynthia Freeland, professor of philosophy at the Houston University. This sentence,
announced as a universal truth, shows that art remains strongly essential for human
beings. It is also assured that everybody knows the importance of art for mankind. Art
appeared at the very moment when human beings were able to act. For ages, it has been
developed, even before written language. Ancient cave-wall paintings illustrate the
importance of creativity or simply of art for human beings. These primitive creations
evolved through times, and nowadays art takes so many forms making rise a countless
number of questions about art. In considering its evolution and the diversity of ways in
which art appears today, the value of art is at the heart of many current debates.
Anyone is conscious that art is vital for men, but conceptions, theories,
considerations, appreciations, valuation, or simply, the definition alighted on art are
strongly different from one person to another. Thus, according to the diversity of artworks
existing today and in face of Progress, we can try to answer the following question : what is
art today? Past theories of art are nowadays revisited in the context of Contemporary Art,
which radically transformed art codes. According to William Rubin, director of the
Museum of Modern Art in New York, « there is no single definition of art »2 and the
historian Thomas McEvilley argues that today « more or less anything can be designated as
art”3. In this way, does anybody today can be an artist? Does each work presented as art
can be really considered as such? What is an artwork? It seems that focusing on past
theories is currently impossible because of the radical evolution of art through times.
Finding a definition for art has always been a crucial problem, as Paul Gauguin tried
with his very last essay What is Art?. In this book, the artist explains that art refers to
something skilfully created by artists. However, artists also require to be defined to
understand the value dedicated to art. Nevertheless, these attempts of definitions are
limited to a plurality of conceptions, challenging the general public perceptions and
philosophers, psychologists and critics theories. Besides, defining what is a work of art is
1 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
2 What is art? What is an artist? Retrieved from http://www.arthistory.sbc.edu/artartists/artartiststoday.html
3 Ibid.
1
definitely difficult in the sense that each work is peculiar, coming from very different kinds
of arts (music or painting for examples). In this way, it seems so hard to give a material
characterization or a physical description (based upon several criteria) of a real work of art.
Thus, is it possible to explain today the difference between a child doodle and a famous
French impressionist painting? Equally, can we say what makes an Art Brut “doodle” or
the Yves Klein Blue Monochrome or again a Johannes Vermeer painting, as a work of art?
However, our world has become a very visual one, making art as more than ever all
around us, and rising the need of understanding what the mankind means by art. At the
same time, many works are commonly admitted as artworks. Hence, the art world is
obviously tied to standards which define what is a real work of art, while it seems that
there is no single answer to what art means. Even if not everyone would agree with one
common definition of art, it is interesting to determine upon what criteria is based the
recognition of a work as art. Then, one question has to be answered : How can we
recognize a work of art? Does anything can be art? Or, simply, what is art?
To answer efficiently this problem, we’ll, firstly, present earlier theories of art, in
comparison to my own conception of it, then, we’ll try to show what is an artist, in ending
this first part by presenting the emergence of Contemporary art which shattered the art
world ; secondly, we’ll try to explain the evolution that art knew through ages, and the
recent establishment of globalization and its impact upon art and its definition ; finally, in
a third part, we’ll depict the recent theories of art by giving the example of Street Art, in
order to finally expose what can be considered as art today.
2
To understand what is art it is fundamental to analyze past theories, their
meaning and their value today. In order to give a relevant explanation, I would like to
present my own definition and contemporary visions of art, because the comparison
between them and illustrious, conclusive, consented theories, can help to understand
what has been art all along centuries and what is art today.
To try to provide a definition of what is art, it is primordial to, first of all, explore
theories, and then, to try to apply those to current times.
To start we can say that human beings has always tried to give a definition to art, in
order to become able to say if anything, especially in Contemporary Art, can be regarded as
art or not.
According to me, art is about creations requiring imagination, creativity, certain
tastes, inventiveness, improvisation, ingeniousness, inspiration, personality, disposition,
soul, and freedom. Art is able to reveal talented and brilliant people, because it is, for me,
the better way to express yourself, to convey messages, beliefs, feelings, ideas and
creativity. I think that art is also powerful, in the sens that it is as old as the mankind, and
because it remains so important for men. It is equally something able to make rise passion,
emotions and feelings such as admiration, rapture or joy. As Cynthia Freeland argues, « art
always has been and always will be important to humans [...] providing insights and joy »
(p.xxi)4. For me, art can arouse interests, vocations, enthusiasm, happiness, wonderment,
and can excite senses. Besides, I argue that nothing else than art can move so intensely
human beings. Art provides entertainment, offering infinite pleasures and discoveries tu
humans. It can be regarded as a kind of apart world, a refuge for reflection or inspiration in
the tumultuous world around us. Because passion and emotions are vital for me, I see art
as definitely unique and indispensable. Finally, I believe that art develops human opinions
or their critical minds, and it constitutes one of the foundations of cultures : for me, art can
give to human beings knowledges, observational skills, insights into history and analytical
thinking, that other universes or human activities are not able to.
4 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
3
Trying to provide a definition of art, by using my own conception of it, would be just
subjective, so restrictive and definitely insufficient. Personal conceptions of art are
important, because each one appreciates art in its own and gives to artworks special values.
Nevertheless, art seems to have standards which define a work as art. What are these
standards? How do they define art and artists? Can we consider them as right and
legitimate? Can these theories be applied to contemporary artworks?
Among the most famous paintings, La Joconde of Leonardo Da Vinci is a good
illustration of the difficulty for human beings to find a definition to art. Indeed, this
renowned work had not always received the same consideration as today. The canvas
achieved a real glory in 1809, when it had been exposed at The Louvre, in Paris. Before, the
painting was totally ignored and unknown. Thus, the face of Mona Lisa earned an
international fame in 1809, and that proved the evolution through ages of theories,
considerations about art and the criteria which define a work as art. In this way, it seems
that the XIXth century presented criteria for a work of art, which have given to La Joconde
the status of masterpiece.
If art has been seen only as a technical in antiquity conceptions, since the XVIIIth
century philosophers never stop to show their continuous interest for art. First of all, many
theories exist, proposing as much as different points of view, and several of them have a
strong significance in the art universe. Theories such as epistemology or ontology are
renowned in art, but some others took a real relevance and acquired a fundamental
influence upon the art world. Hence, theories of Plato, Hume, Kant, Hegel, Tolstoy and
Dewey constitute the best examples of historically influential art definitions. Famous
philosophers’ theories, such as Of the Standard of Taste of Hume, or What is Art? of
Tolstoy tried to demonstrate what made a creation as a work of art. When philosophers
started to develop theories about Art, the idea put forward was that art imitates nature. Art
was regarded as an imitation of what existed. According to Plato or Ciceron, art is an
illusion and a tool for human instruction and knowledge. For Ciceron, art is inferior to
nature and is perceived as second compared to it because it is its a rival. For these
philosophers, art can exist only as a copy, that Stendhal explained by using the example of
literature : “a novel is a mirror”5. Additionally, according to Aristotle’s theory, art is a
technical which imitates nature, but it is also a tool for the improvement of reality. Ciceron
and Schopenhauer developed the idea that art is also a tool for knowledge and a stage
5 Stendhal, Le Rouge et le Noir. Dir. Michel Crouzet. Ed. Lgf. Janvier 1972.
4
within Education : “a work of art is only a way used to improve knowledges of the idea
[which] constitutes the aesthetic pleasure”6.
Theories of art started to become important when Plato tried to explain why art is
related to beauty, and not solely technical. According to him, beauty is tied to truth, and he
spoke about “the experience of beauty”7. Plato explained this experience by demonstrating
that the beauty of bodies is linked with the kindness of souls, which corresponds to the
truth of sciences. In this way, for Plato, the experience of art can be theorized as a science
because of the link between beauty, kindness and truth : beauty is an objective reality
proposing an experience to the public by showing the beauty around him.
Then, since the XVIIIth century, philosophers started to speak about a
consciousness of beauty within human subjectivity. In this way, beauty acquired a new
meaning : it can come under individual sensitivity. Even if personal emotions cannot
constitute the bases of the consideration of beauty, philosophers included new notions in
their theories. Thus, this period is marked by the insertion of new ideas such as “taste” and
“aesthetics”. Cynthia Freeland explains that there was « standard of taste which [was]
universal [but also] artistic universals »(p172)8. Hence, according to Kant, beauty is the
result of a paradox : beauty is what universally pleased to people, without any concept,
meaning that no rule or mathematic explanation can define beauty. Regardless, rules exist
in art and style, but they are not sufficient to justify beauty. The notion of universality
refers to the revelation of beauty, because it implies that anybody judges something
beautiful, even if objectivity is put aside. In this theory, something that we judge beautiful
requires to activate our faculties, by making them play “in unison” and making beauty as
an harmony inside us9. According to Kant, this “miracle”, implies human skills such as
“sensitivity”, “imagination” or “reason”. It can also occur thanks to the mime of nature :
when a work of art is accomplished, it seems to be necessary to humans and no detail of it
can be changed10.
Taking up the idea of Plato, Kant also spoke about art in terms of aesthetic
experience, and added the notion of freedom. Indeed, accomplished works of art require to
mime the creative will of humans. Then, Hume completed Kant’s theory in underlining the
fact that art is above all based on ‘taste’ and ‘beauty’. As Cynthia Freeland explains, for
6 Schopenhauer, Le monde comme Volonté et comme Représentation. Ed. PUF. 1966. p.497
7 Richard Dufour, Plotinus: A Bibliography 1950–2000, Ed. Leiden: E.J. Brill. 2002.
8 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
9 Alain Renaut. Introduction à la Critique de la faculté de juger, Aubier, 1995
10 Ibid.
5
Hume and Kant « taste [corresponds to the] agreement about which authors and artworks
are the best », creating a kind of « consensus » (p.9)11. Hume also developed a theory about
art and aesthetics judgment, using human thoughts and emotions. This theory is often
called Theory of taste and beauty. Hume considered the natural capacity of taste as
fundamental for human beings (as an ability), to make moral and aesthetics judgments.
Cynthia Freeland details these theories by pointing that for Hume and Kant, taste is « a
refined ability to perceive quality in a work [of art]»(p.9)12. Additionally, Hegel also
developed a theory about art, its production and beauty. For him, beauty occurs in human
creations because nothing from nature can be more beautiful than something made by an
individual. Something natural is nonvolunteer, whereas a human work is wise. For Hegel,
beauty only can be a human production because it requires to previously think about it.
This theory also means that art is the best way for human beings to create beauty.
Thus, for these theorists, the only way to characterize art is to look inside the
experience of a work of art. For instance, Kant argued that a work is art because it takes a
significance through the look of the audience. A work is art when somebody is looking at it.
Each individual looks at a work in its own, interprets it, or tries to understand it, giving to
the artwork a special value and artistic interest. For Kant « we label an object beautiful
because it promotes an internal harmony or ‘free play’ of our mental faculties ; we call
something ‘beautiful’ when it elicits this pleasure »(Ibid. p.12) and that « for Kant, the
aesthetic is experienced when a sensuous object stimulates our emotions, intellect and
imagination » (Ibid. p.14)13.
In addition, by publishing What is Art?, Tolstoy appeared as an other philosopher
who marked the theorization of art. First of all, his conception, based on aesthetics,
describes the criteria that exactly define a work of Art. According to him, art must create an
emotion to the public. For Tolstoy, this emotional link between the artist and the audience
is crucial. As Cynthia Freeland explains, for him « an artist’s chief job is to express and
communicate emotions »(p.155)14. Emotion is the primordial condition for regarding a
work as art. Tolstoy argued that a real artwork requires the ability of gathering and uniting
people through communication, which is possible only when the work is clear.
Communication refers to the clear, sincere, singular and authentic message, focused on
emotions, conveyed by the work. In Tolstoy’s theory, genuineness is also a crucial
component of any work of art.
11 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art?Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
12 Ibid.
13 Ibid.
14 Ibid.
6
For him, the concept of art implies any human activity because a real artwork transmits
past experienced feelings, that he called “external facts”. In this book, the writer described
all the qualities that a work needs to be considered as art. Added to genuineness, another
criterion is fundamental : a real artwork must foster feelings of universal brotherhood,
while a bad art inhibits such feelings.
Besides, Tolstoy thought that any good art contains a Christian message, because
Christianity teaches an absolute brotherhood of all men, and nothing else can play this
role. Finally, according to Tolstoy, art reproduces past models. Hence, this notion implies
that contemporary works of art don’t transmit sincere messages or expressions. Tolstoy
explained it by the fact that a contemporary work cannot be tied to the most enlightened
cultural ideals of the community in which the contemporary artist evolves. Indeed, for him,
a real artwork has to unify people in embracing crucial values of the society in order to
preserve its tradition of art.
Theorization of art evolved a lot through times and new ideas about what is art
emerged in the XVIIIth century. Many philosophers and artists proposed a new
conception: art represents without using imitation. For these philosophers, the role of art
is to express the superiority of mind and nature. Art can have a short link with reality
without copy or imitate it. In this way, art doesn’t imitate anymore, it symbolizes by
making things and facts visible. At this moment, art became superior to nature and eternal
because it is different from the evanescent human existence. Art appeared at this moment
as a pure reality, able to delight and move people. For instance, famous artists and
philosophers, such as Hegel and Baudelaire, supported this idea. The poet expressed
virulently the idea that imitation is opposed to a fundamental component of art which is
imagination : “it is useless and tiresome to represent what exists, because what exists
doesn’t satisfied me [...] nature is ugly, and I prefer the monsters of ma fantasy to the
positive crudeness”15.
With these new ideas, perceptions of art eveolved. Nietzche and Klee explained that
art makes things visible, and that art must embellish life by concealing or re-interpreting
ugly and painful things of life. At the beginning of the XIXth century theories showed that
nature is not the referent of art anymore, and that the function of art is to put ideas into
sensitivity. For instance, Reverdy explained that poetry is a “magical act of transmutation
of reality”16, that Kandinsky defined as an internal and spiritual beauty constituting the
15 Baudelaire. Exposition universelle de 1855. Ed. La Pleiade, tome 2, 1976, 9587.
16 Luc Decaunes. Entretiens sur les lettres et les arts, numéro spécial « Hommage à Pierre Reverdy », Rodez, 1961
7
artistic necessity : “the most modern musicians, such as Debussy, reproduce spiritual
impressions [...] and change them in spiritual images [...] purely musical”17). During this
century, as Heidegger showed, art is more about reality or the creation of it, than nature.
Oscar Wilde for instance wrote that “art invented London fogs“18.
Later, art was defined as something able to transform human perception of the
world. Fancastel explained that the aim of art is not to copy the universe, but consists in
the exploration of the world in order to inform people in a new way19. Famous artists of this
period supported this idea, such as Proust : “thanks to art, instead of seeing one world [...]
we can see [our world] enriched and multiplied”20. He pointed that there are as much
worlds around us as original artists. Klee also showed that the artist is the one who makes
us see what we cannot perceive naturally21, and Merleau-Ponty explained that we look at
what the artist proposes in order to see something visible, which was inaccessible for our
vision before22.
The role of the artist also needed to be defined, through ages, as Cynthia Freeland
points : « [...]questions about artists : who are they, and what makes them
special?»(p.xx)23. The definition of an artist was very reductive when philosophers said that
it just refers to genuineness. For these philosophers, such as Kant, « the mysterious quality
in an artist [is] to create work with beauty », and that “genius [is what] gives the rule to
art” (Ibid. p131)24. To illustrate it, we can say that « Rousseau denied that women could be
genius because they lack the requisite passion »(Ibid. p131)25.
According to philosophers, art requires many conditions to be considered as such.
These theories provided many ideas about what is art, by giving standards about it.
Nevertheless, through two centuries these theories evolved a lot bringing all along times
new criteria to art. Moreover, according to these important theories, art needs to be about
beauty, taste, technicals, or again aesthetics. Does this theorization remained true during
the following centuries? Can these philosophers theories count today when speaking about
art?
17 Wassily Kandinsky. Concerning the Spiritual in Art. Ed. Kessinger Publishing, 2004
18 Oscar Wilde and the creation of London Fog retrieved from http://aestheticstoday.blogspot.com/2008/09/oscarwilde-
and-creation-of-london-fog.html
19 L’oeuvre d’art retrieved from http://www.idixa.net/Pixa/pagixa-0801012159.html
20 Proust, Le temps retrouvé, Ed. Folio Gallimard, 1954, p.34
21 Klee,Théorie de l’art moderne, Ed. Médiations Denoël, 1964, p.34
22 Merleau-Ponty, L’Oeil et l’esprit, Ed. Folio-Essais Gallimard, 1964, p.13
23 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
24 Ibid.
25 Ibid.
8
If art is the subject of many theories and debates for a long time, theorization of
art took many various forms, and evolved a lot. Today, specialists, philosophers, artists,
and critics seem to meet difficulties to give a common definition about art. Standards in
art also perpetuate and take new turns according to periods, art evolutions and
contexts. In this way, does the evolution of the world, customs, morals, progress, or
simply the evolution of art(s), can have an impact on it and its definition?
Over time, theories of art have been challenged because of many changes which
affected the art world : mores evolution, cultures sharing, progress, communication, etc.
Today, contemporary art shows how much art evolved, offering more and more forms,
revealing more and more artists from all over the world, and increasingly offering
controversial artworks. Contemporary art rises many questions about it and its value, and
above all a major matter : what is art today? Does anything can be art? Can any creation
called “art” can be considered as such?
Traditional definitions of art are definitely questioned, for many reasons tied to
contemporaneity and the evolution of the world Through times, cultures have been
developed and shared, communication lived many major marches and today we can speak
about a «globalisation». These advancements created a new level of creativity and
exploration for artists. The world becomes more and more connected, and artists or critics
are now aware of the idea that art across the world is becoming more familiar and
homogeneous. Globalization also rises problems about the value of art or artists, because a
criticized phenomenon appeared : the art business. Somebody who creates works,
recognized as art, can today sell them with exorbitant prices. If globalization seems to
permit the development of arts and their diffusion, giving them success, this phenomenon
radically changed the art value.
Globalization brought many changes to art, but also refers to the growing marketing
of the artistic framework. This phenomenon is today tied to a problem : are we in face of
the death of art or an enrichment of the cultural diversity? In this way, definitions of art
are nowadays so various. Nevertheless, as Cynthia Freeland explains « the art world is a
competitive place, and artists need any edge they can get, including shock value »(p.6)26,
which means that artists have to introduce novelties in their works in response to the
market. Dewey sum up this idea into the notion of « mass production » (Ibid. p.6)27.
26 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
27 Ibid.
9
Globalization implies a new international cultural context and it is because « art has always
been affected by cultural contact [that evolved] into distinctive art forms » (Cynthia
Freeland, p88)28. In this way, if globalization is strongly criticized because of the expansion
of business challenging the value of art, this phenomenon seems to radically develop art.
Cynthia Freeland speaks about « the long history of worldwide cultural interactions, and
their tremendous impact on art production»(p88)29. Many unknown art forms, related to a
particular culture or place, are today famous all over the world thanks to globalization of
art. For instance, Street Art is nowadays prised and appreciate everywhere. These works
are also now exposed in galleries, in many countries, whereas urban arts were solely
present in the United-States there’s about 30 years ago. Today, Street Art is visible all over
the world, making people from each country able to access and discover it. If « contact
with another culture’s art can help one understand [an]other culture », this idea is
regardless questioned by the fact that « our experience will be enhanced by having what
Dewey called ‘external facts’»(Ibid. p. 88)30. In reality, art from other cultures than our
own does not always correspond to our contemporary criteria “for art shown in galleries
and expressing individual aims or ‘genius’»(Ibid. p89)31.
This expansion of arts is also ensure by museums, offering an increasingly large
access to them : « museums preserve, collect, and educate the public and convey standards
about art’s value and quality » (Ibid. p.90)32. But, original standards, defined by
philosophers, seem to be different today and we can ask « whose standards, and
how? »(Ibid. p90)33 and even if « people in the field of aesthetics do more than try to define
what art is, [we] also want to explain why it is valued [...] how much people pay for
it »(Ibid. p6)34.
Globalization seems to affect positively the art world by enhancing cultures sharing,
artistic creations, and art forms diversity. This phenomenon makes art accessible to many
people, and permits to each one to discover different arts. This is possible thanks to the
new technologies enhancing communication and sharing. Nevertheless, a lot of critics and
specialists point the bad effects of globalization upon art such as « museum’s changing
28 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
29 Ibid.
30 Ibid.
31 Ibid.
32 Ibid.
33 Ibid.
34 Ibid.
10
purposes », « [the] inflation in the art market » or « [the] astronomical prices [of
Artworks]» (p. 102, 103, 105, Cynthia Freeland)35. More often, the evolution of the art
world rises this important question : « Is money the name of the game, an inescapable fact
about art today? »(Ibid. p.107)36. Museums are the first place which broadcasts art, its
standards to the public, and which gives access to art. However, globalization had an
important impact on them, challenging the art value and its purposes. For instance, when
the Pompidou center in Paris added restaurants or bookstores to its galleries, the art world
was a kind of chocked. The cause is the growing insertion of business into the art universe,
and the new museums aims. According to many specialists, these new behaviors have an
effect upon the audience and culture : « display methods altered viewers’ perceptions [...]
causing people to seek the high art value of something like a mundane and inexpensive
fishing net » (Ibid. p.105)37. Museums today settle a lot of actions related to business, such
as membership solicitations, which disrupt philosophers ideas about art, and above all the
value of art itself. As Cynthia Freeland develops, « a membership solicitation brochure
[created by] the Australia’s National Gallery of Art [in 1995, which uses the artwork Blue
Poles of J. Pollock]” makes rise an important matter : « after succumbing to this appeal,
will the new museum member really be able to look at Blue Poles for its artistic value? »
(p.105)38. In this way, one question remains : does money changed the value of art?
Cynthia Freeland also proposes a significant example to illustrate this phenomenon : the
case of Vincent Van Gogh artworks. Indeed, when the artist was alive, his works were
unknown and the artist never sold them. Nevertheless, today the value of these works is
huge, notably when considering the prices of their sales in 1987. Cynthia Freeland points
« the [grotesque] irony in light of the artist’s own poverty and despair over being unable to
sell works during his lifetime » (p.107)39. In this way, art business is becoming worrying
when considering the art value, but, at the same time, it makes obvious the quality or the
value of certain artists or artworks.
If globalization and new museums goals/habits have a strong effect upon the value
of art, it can have a positive effect, in the sens that museums increasingly propose different
art forms and permit to many artists to exist. These novelties enhance art creation and its
sharing. Besides, globalization obliges artists to escape or confront the art market, creating
a huge diversity in artistic creativity. As Cynthia Freeland explains, « some take money as
35 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
36 Ibid.
37 Ibid.
38 Ibid.
39 Ibid.
11
their subject matter by sculpting or painting it, even including real money in their art »
such as Hans Haacke (Germany) who « has made commercialization and corporate
support of art exhibitions the central subject of his work » (p.112)40. As mentioned
previously, globalization dynamized art forms, revealed numerous artists from all over the
world and enlarged access to many cultures such as the American graffiti art. This
particular Art form is nowadays well known, and Street Art appears everywhere and is now
shared in museums. Street Art proposes specials works with important messages, and this
art form is one of the best examples of the use of art business as a major subject or creation
source. In this way, Cynthia Freeland explains that « Graffiti artists, with their strike-andvanish
tactics, seem to reject the gallery system » (p112)41.
If the idea that « Human experiences of art have been significantly changed in this
postmodern age of the Internet, videos, [...] ads and posters »(Cynthia Freeland, p 178) is
supported by many professionals of art, nevertheless we can say that « mass production
contributed to human emancipation by promoting new modes of critical perception »
(Ibid. p179)42. The recent shift to art business enhanced access to art and constitutes now a
new source of creation for artists.
The evolution of Art thanks to many artists, and progress enhanced by globalization
and technologies, radically changed philosophers conceptions of what is art : today art is
not just about beauty, aesthetics, taste or quality. Art is nowadays not only referring to
beautiful paintings or sculptures anymore, but has to be tied to many artistic forms,
cultures, and rules (such as business). This has been possible thanks to institutions
recognitions of what is art. In this way, does any creation exposed in a gallery or a museum
is inevitably a work of art?
40 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
41 Ibid.
42 Ibid.
12
According to Arthur Danto, a professor of philosophy at the Columbia University
and art critic for the Nation since 1984, says that “anything can be art”43, and nowadays
it seems that it is a common belief, or at least, a kind of reality which create big debates.
Contemporary art and artists brought the idea that anything and everything can be art,
and that anybody can be an artist. This kind of common truth is nevertheless often
criticized and it appears that anyone has its own opinion about it. Yet, today, we can find
all kinds of art forms and creations within museums, and contemporary artists can
propose now surprising and criticizingly artworks. In this way, is it possible nowadays
to say that anything can be art?
So many new conceptions of art have been provided since the end of the XIXth
century, and the value and the role of Art are now in face of new theorizations. The first
idea brought by contemporary art is that it is not about beauty anymore. Ugliness can be a
topic for an artistic representation. In philosophers theories, ugliness was synonymous of
disorder and something to cancel because opposed to art itself and beauty. In classical
aesthetics, art is an imitation of nature, or an embellishment of reality (an imitation which
embellishes things). Ingres, Baudelaire or Boileau strongly criticized this traditional
conception by saying that the ugliness of the world don’t need to be transcended but
assumed and exploited by art. Nowadays, ugliness is a part of art, because it is notably
used for many denunciations or accusations. Malraux explained for instance that Goya
revealed “the dark side of the world”44. Thus, it is possible to make a wonderful painting
representing the ugliness of the universe, like the Portrait des Régents of Frans Hals.
Besides, Art can put forward what is vulgar, insipid or insignificant. For example, Flaubert
spoke in his books about trivial things or sadly familiar objects in a very beautiful way : “I
like what is revolting, it is the sublime of the bottom”45. Hence, when ugliness in used in
art, it can become a tool for the expression of messages. It seems so that, the evolution of
art, marked by the entrance of ugliness in artworks, anything now can be use for creating
art and that these non conventional practices in art reveal its power when an artist wants
to convey a particular message.
43 Kenneth Baker. AFTER THE END OF ART retrieved from
http://articles.sfgate.com/1997-02-23/books/17743948_1_art-critic-arthur-c-danto-true-art
44 Jean-Pierre Zarader. Malraux et Goya : Saturne, le destin, l’art et Goya. Retrieved from
http://www.philopsis.fr/spip.php?article184
45 Yvon Le Scanff. Le paysage romantique et l’expérience du sublime. Editions Champ Vallon, 2007
13
Additionally, as Kant tried to explain, art is not solely about an embellishment of
reality or nature, but it is about spirituality, that doesn’t appear in nature. A precise
conception of beauty in art is not legitimate anymore because other notions seem to be
more important, such as emotion. According to Kandinsky or Kant, beauty is insufficient
and an internal beauty sparking off emotions and feelings is in fact the roots of art. The
notion of beauty related to specific rules and standards is not available today because the
idea of a conventional beauty is opposed to contemporary art. According to the Breton’s
metaphor, the artistic experience is in reality not necessarily agreeable. Kant also speaks
about a “negative pleasure”, that he calls a “sublime [experience]”46. Another example is
relevant for showing how much beauty is not the essence of art anymore, it is
contemporary music. This one totally avoids harmony (before considered as crucial and
inevitable in music), showing that taste can now reject beauty in art.
Contemporary artists claim the art of transforming completely any trivial object into
a pleasant or moving artwork. For instance, when Van Gogh painted dirty shoes, or when
Toulouze-Lautrec represented prostitutes, making these images so beautiful or agreeable
to look at, theorization of art have been so challenged. Art is not systematically
synonymous of beauty anymore. In 1951, Jean Dubuffet, pioneer of the Art Brut
movement, speaks about “the imposture of beauty” and explains that it is impossible to
gather even two individuals under the same idea of what beauty is : “the Occidental culture
at each new century proclaims beautiful what was proclaimed ugly at the past century”47.
Dubuffet denounces the idea that beauty discernment needs a “special sense” : according
to him, it is important to be aware that any object of the world can constitute for anybody
the base of something illuminating and fascinating. Since the 1950′s, contemporary art
imposes a new conception of it, meaning that today art is not about beauty or standards,
but about feelings above all. Art is nowadays considered as something which gives a
particular value to an insignificant thing, by attracting people’s attention on things which
would escape us. According to recent theorizations of art, its power consists in making
lasting what is naturally fleeting, temporary and passing.
The concept of artwork or masterpiece also evolved through times, especially when
contemporary art gave foremost more importance to the artistic creation itself. We can
illustrate it with many examples of key evolutions within contemporary art. First, the
notion of work of art at the XVIIIth century refered to its specificity opposed to the serial
production of industrial products. We can compare this idea of ‘artwork singularity’ with
46 Alain Renaut. Introduction à la Critique de la faculté de juger, Ed. Aubier, 1995
47 Jean Dubuffet, Positions anticulturelles,in Prospectus et tous écrits suivants, ed. Gallimard, 1951
14
the Pop art movement which includes repetitions, series and industrial aesthetics. Second,
for a long time, art had a religious, political and magical function : artworks were in the
service of a social aim. Contemporary art changed the idea that art was a tool for the
society. For instance, the dadaist or surrealistic movements uses art as a political weapon,
a transgression, or a subversion of the social order. Then, in earliest theories, art was a tool
for cultures in creating durable artworks permitting to reinforce the identity of a people. At
the end of the XVIIIth century, an artwork needed to settle in time (notion of timelessness
of art) by letting an immortal trace and speaking for the entire mankind. This has to be
opposed to contemporary art with fleeting artworks, notably from the Body art or the Land
art. Many artists such as Christo made important works of art called “happenings” and
challenging traditional theories of art. Additionally, at the beginning of the XIXth a work of
art is tied to the notions of ‘creation’, ‘originality’, ‘novelty’, or ‘non reproduction’. We can
also compare this traditional definition of art with contemporary movements such as Pop
art or Ready made. Several artists like Duchamp proposed many mise-en-scenes, by using
simple common objects. This detournement of the day-to-day, often including
reproduction, radically disrupts traditional theories of art. Besides, if for a long time art
has been created under anonymity, the individuality and singularity of an artwork became
so important through centuries. A work of art corresponds nowadays to an artist, who is
the author of the work. The artist is now as important as the artwork.
Contemporary art radically made evolved theories, conceptions, and definitions
about art. Several artists, such as Andy Warhol or Marcel Duchamp, symbolize the new
turn that art took, especially from the moment when their works had been exposed in
museums. As Cynthia Freeland explains, « an object like Brillo Boxes [of Andy Warhol]
was baptized as ‘art’ if accepted by museum and gallery directors and purchased by art
collectors» and « with Brillo Boxes, Warhol demonstrated that anything can be a work of
art» (p. 57)48. In this way, philosophers conceptions of art and traditional definitions of it
nowadays appear as outdated. Indeed, contemporary art includes today many different
forms that past theories couldn’t see as artistic. We can also say that « narrow and
restricted views of earlier philosophers, who defined art in terms of Beauty, Form, etc.,
seem to rigid » because « even shocking art [...] can now count as art»(Ibid. p.55)49. As
explained previously, what the most correctly defines art is currently feelings that it can
make rise. A work of art requires today to be able to transmit feelings such as emotion,
48 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
49 Ibid.
15
shock, admiration, joy, fascination, openmindedness, etc. For Cynthia Freeland, « [a work
of art] may be viewed as art [if] it communicates thoughts or feelings »(p.55)50. Equally, a
work regarded as art needs to present a particular meaning or message. Danto explained it
by saying that a work of art embodies a meaning that the audience interprets in its own :
“nothing is an artwork without an interpretation that constitutes it as such»51.
Hence, contemporary art seems to contain recent standards and conventions which
help to define a work as art. If for ages art has been tied to particular standards, nowadays
they are less rigid and are, above all, based on the fact that an artwork is something
‘extraordinary’ or simply, a unique creation able to act on the audience. So, contemporary
art is strongly different from art defined in past theories, and art also seems to be more
accepted than it was in the past. That doesn’t mean that art holds more values, but that it is
nowadays related to changing and expanding values. This has resulted in a greater
acceptance of what is art and of who is an artist.
Today, art is not tied to an established and recognized value, art exists and holds a
value thanks to the viewer’s attribution of meanings to an art work. Additionally, the
evolution of arts through times has to be linked with particular contexts and the situation
of the art world at certain periods. In this way, if contemporary art seems to be sometimes
unaccessible for many reasons, it is necessary to be aware of the context of realization of a
contemporary work of art to appreciate it. Indeed, as Cynthia Freeland argues « even
artists from within a nation, people, or culture may face difficulties in assessing meaning
and value in art» (p.87)52. Thus, today it seems that the knowledge of the origins and the
context of an artwork is essential to understand why it is regarded as art. Consequently,
museums provide informations about each work of art exposed to the visitors in order to
make easier the access and the appreciation of a work. As Danto explained, « what artists
can make as art depends upon the context of intentions possible for a given era and
culture»53, idea also defended by Dewey saying that « we must learn the language of art by
entering into the spirit of the relevant community »54. Consequently, contemporary art
seems today to contain all kinds of creations, from all over the world, and the appreciation
of a contemporary artwork, as well as the recognition of it as art, are possible as soon as we
can know the context of its creation.
50 Ibid.
51 Arthur C. Danto. After the End of Art: Contemporary Art and the Pale of History. Princeton University Press, 1997.
52 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
53 Arthur C. Danto. After the End of Art: Contemporary Art and the Pale of History. Princeton University Press, 1997.
54 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
16
An other point is important when trying to provide a definition of art today, it is the
case of the artist. Contemporary art includes works of artists from each country in the
world, with many different status, life, technicals, etc. Indeed, it seems that today anybody
can be an artist. For instance, women have been excluded from art for a long time, and
only men could be artists, especially when considering XVIIIth philosophers theories. This
idea, sounding like unfair, outdated or absurd, regardless is, for instance, supported by
Linda Nochlin in her famous essay of 1971, saying that “there are no women equivalents
for Michelangelo or Rembrandt [...] de Koonin or Warhol”(p127)55. In this way, as Cynthia
Freeland demonstrates, at all time « even where women’s contributions have been
recognized [...] the artists still experienced restrictions and discrimination»(p128)56.
Nevertheless, contemporary art nowadays also contains female artworks : women artists
have been recognized as such and as important in art history, as much as men. For
example, the Museum of Women in the Arts of Washington promotes female art, and is
only dedicated to women creations. Many women have also been recognized as artists and
achieved an international recognition and fame, such as Cindy Sherman, Barbara Kruger
or Jenny Holzer. If « sometimes women’s ambition in their art was restricted by their own
sense of what is appropriate to their gender, or by internalized sexism» (Ibid, p127)57,
female artworks are now regarded as male ones : « the social conditions have changed
enormously to facilitate more female participation in the arts and greater recognition of
women artists’ merits» (Ibid, p.126)58. So, contemporary art is today composed by all kinds
of art forms made by all ‘kinds’ of human beings. If for XVIIIth and XIXth centuries
philosophers women couldn’t be artists, today it is blatant that they are able to create art,
as much as men.
When considering traditional theorizations of art, it is obvious that nowadays they
are not legitimate anymore for defining what is art. As mentioned previously, art is today
about emotions and meanings. Many recent theories are more often used to speak about
art and are radically opposed to earlier theories. First, the expression theory defines art as
an experience giving emotions and offering ideas or messages to the audience. This one
explains that art communicates both feelings and ideas, and defines the artist’s role as the
sharing of ideas in an original and unique way.
55 Linda Nochlin. Realism. Style and civilization. Ed. Penguin, 1971
56 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
57 Ibid.
58 Ibid.
17
Langer argues that a work is art when “the experience is new”59 for the viewers. As Cynthia
Freeland shows, in this theory, feelings are at the core of art : « whereas Tolstoy thought
the artist had a feeling that boiled out into a work. Collingwood also argued that making
arts comes [...] before having a feeling. To express the feeling in art is part of
understanding the feeling» and “[the artist's] act of expressing [...] is therefore an
exploration of his own emotions» (p161)60. The expression theory also supports the idea
that social and historical context of artists is required to appreciate a work of art. This
theory seems to be ideal to define what is art today and points the idea that anybody can
make art. Cynthia Freeland explains that « when viewers follow the artist’s efforts, we
recreate the process of self-discovery, so we too become artists »(p161)61. If this theory is
suitable for defining contemporary art, there are many other ideal conceptions, such as the
cognitive theory. This one explains that the « art’s role is enabling people to perceive,
manipulate, or otherwise grapple with reality [and art is] a function in our lives and should
not be remote [because it] is not just something to store on a shelf, but something people
use to enrich their world and their perceptions» (Ibid. p166)62. Dewey, pioneer of this idea,
also argued that art is a source of knowledge for people, by helping them to perceive the
world around them. For him, art is a kind of language altering individuals modes of
perceiving. We can sump up this notion with « art as something that we humans employ to
engage with our environment – by transforming our perceptions, art energizes us »(Ibid.
p169)63. The expression and cognitive theories explain how much art is a tool for human
communication, enhancing conveyance of messages, ideas, emotions and knowledges.
These theories also underline the fact that older theories, for example those based on
beauty, cannot well define what is art today.
Beyond official recent theories, many artists and art professionals provide
definitions or conceptions about art. Indeed, as demonstrated previously, there are as
much definitions about art as human beings. Globally all art specialists agree to say that it
is impossible to provide one only precise definition about what is art. Nevertheless, these
specialists bring ideas about art that can be used to sum up the current role or status of art.
For instance, Dr. Robert J. Belton explains that “any brief definition of art would
59 Howard Gardner, Philosophy in a New Key Revisited: An Appreciation of Susanne Langer, Art, Mind, and Brain: A
Cognitive Approach to Creativity, New York: Basic Books, 2001, p. 48–54
60 R. G. Collingwood. Outlines of a Philosophy of Art. Ed. Preface. 1925
61 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
62 Ibid.
63 Ibid.
18
oversimplify the matter, but we can say that all the definitions offered over the centuries
include some notion of human agency, whether through manual skills (as in the art of
sailing or painting or photography), intellectual manipulation (as in the art of politics), or
public or personal expression (as in the art of conversation)” and that “since this embraces
many types of production that are not conventionally deemed to be art, perhaps a better
term for them would be visual culture” 64.
So, it seems that even if a precise definition doesn’t exist for art, it still have
regardless several characteristics and still be surrounded by many notions. Ellen
Dissanayake, an independent scholar who focuses on the anthropological exploration of art
and culture, published What is Art For?, listing the characteristics of art. For her, art is
“the product of conscious intention, a self rewarding activity, a tendency to unite dissimilar
things, a concern with change and variety, the aesthetic exploitation of familiarity vs.
surprise, the aesthetic exploitation of tension vs. release, the imposition of order on
disorder, the creation of illusions, an indulgence in sensuousness, the exhibition of skill, a
desire to convey meanings, an indulgence in fantasy, the aggrandizement of self or others,
illustration, the heightening of existence, revelation, personal adornment or
embellishment, therapy, the giving of meaning to life, the generation of unselfconscious
experience, the provision of paradigms of order and/or disorder, training in the perception
of reality[...]”65 and so on. Equally, we can put forward the fact that specialists,
introductory books and study guides on art history, usually propose common basic
functions of art : to adorn, to beautify, to express, to illustrate, to mediate, to persuade, to
record, to redefine reality, and to redefine art. In this way, it seems that art is a so large
world, including an infinite number of forms, styles, origins, technicals, topics, etc.,
creating then an infinite number of conceptions and notions related to art.
Conclusively, the idea that ‘anything can be art’ could simply be summarized by the
fact that it is impossible to precisely define a work of art, because of the huge evolution that
art knew. Art is today a vast and all-embracing universe, including too much things : the
plurality of artistic movements, technicals, topics/themes treated, styles, etc. This so large
and rich diversity seems to keep human beings for finding a common definition about what
is art.
64 Art History : a preliminary hand book. Retrieved from
http://web.ubc.ca/okanagan/creative/links/arthistory/What_is_Art_.html
65 Ellen Dissanayake approach. Retrieved from http://denisdutton.com/dissanayake_review.htm
19
In order to well understand how much art evolved, and what art is today, the
example of the Street Art movement is ideal. This art, finding its origins in Graffiti, is often
considered as an illegal expression by the larger society, constituting vandalism. Graffiti art
derives from a tradition of subway graffiti birth in New York during the 1970′s. This art
form has been spread to many urban places around the USA but also to the rest of the
world, especially in Europe during the 1980′s. Graffiti art is now known as urban Street Art
and it can be defined as a cross-cultural phenomenon, proposing personalized space or
landscapes.
Originally, Street art expresses the identity of ethnic unities as well as diversity.
Graffiti can be sump up as concrete manifestations of personal and communal ideologies.
Street art works are visually striking or insistent, and often provocative by representing the
work of unrecognized or underground groups, radical student movements or dissatisfied
people. Street art is also seen as a rich art form because it often combines with other
expressive artistic forms such as poster or comic books, mural painting, newspapers or
political art exhibitions.
When it was born, Graffiti art was about monochrome « tags » and evolved then into
multicolored works (known as « pieces » derived from the word « masterpiece »). Nowadays,
these pieces are considered as real art and present a museum quality. Consequently,
Graffiti art moved from its original urban locations to the walls of galleries and museums.
Urban art also became attractive to many professional fine artists, such as Keith Haring,
who has been « legitimized » when his works moved from New York’s subway walls to
American galleries or even private collectors. Today, Street art is also studied in art
schools, which radically enhanced people’s interest in urban art and made easier the use of
graffiti (originally thanks to paint spray) by any lambda individual. In addition, many
Street Art artists participated to the emancipation of art, by offering artworks somewhere
else than in museums (which are even today visited more by a certain part of the
population). These artists promoted an easy and full access to art, without paying anything
or without belonging to a particular social group or to the richer part of the population. For
instance, Basquiat made several works in streets which have been then exposed in
museums and which acquired an very important value (and prices).
During the 1980′s, Street Art is increasingly present in European streets, and it
achieved the status of art when artists, such as Ernest Pignon Ernest, decided to propose
artworks in streets. Then, many artists became famous and enhanced the Street Art
phenomenon : Xavier Prou, Spliff Gachette, Blek, Obey, Kinsey, and the most famous of
20
them, Robin Cunningham well known as Banksy. In this way, when Street art was
regarded as vandalism for a long time, today it is a full-fledged art existing all over the
world, exposed in museums and galleries, studied in schools and also implied in the art
business.
Urban Art have been easily legitimated because this artistic movement well refers to
the purposes of art : inform people, convey messages and ideas, represent a lurking reality,
share opinions, denounce and critic, move viewers and make them think or react, etc.
Consequently, Street Art seems to constitute the best example of the reject of established
art theories and of what art is today. Street Art moved from the status of crime to real art
form, showing how much art evolved and enhanced the diversity of art forms. Because
Street Art is originally created by lambda individuals, the idea that anybody can be an
artist makes sens. By offering minimal artworks (made with words and simple materials),
Street Art improved the access to art and the now popular idea that anything can be art. In
Street Art, the artists canvas are public ones, with off-limits surfaces, visible for all to see
and without any exchange of cash : this movement simply shows that standards in art are
not required anymore to speak about it, and, above all, that art is accessible to each one,
whether you are an artist or a viewer. Street art is now regarded as genuine art, when
considering the artist’s intention and value to audience. Specialists argue that it has form,
color, and other base properties arranged into structures that qualify it aesthetically as
being art. Urban art is art because it shows the artist’s intention to produce a work of art,
also because Street art has an established history of development in style and technical. By
having been recognized by the art world, Street Art has become marketable and has been
legitimized by gallery openings and museum exhibitions.
Many artists and specialists argue that urban artworks constitute a part of the art
world because it is a unique way for any lambda individual to express a talent or an
idea/opinion/message. According to George Dickie, something is art when it is regarded as
such by both institutions (museums, galleries, etc.) ant the artist himself. In this way, the
entrance of Street art in museums, galleries, auctions, and the acceptance of it by the art
world, shows that Dickie’s definition of art could be the only one to keep in mind when
speaking about art today. In this way, Street art seems to be the current best example of
contemporary art saying that anybody can be an artist or that anything can be art.
21
Contemporary art now excludes nothing, and anything can count as art : objects,
melodies, advertisements, words, gestures, games, graphics, forms, emotions, concrete
actions, etc. Today art doesn’t have any limit and is about anything : unspeakable, hatred,
horror, beauty, nil, etc. The particularity of art is that it has become a kind of label in which
personal tastes and opinions are fundamental. Each one has its own definition about art,
or at least, regards art in its own. This recent essential notion is opposed to traditional or
academical conceptions of art. Besides, contemporary art is now everywhere, challenging
the world, life, society and our ways of thinking. If it seems that human beings sometimes
need tools to feel open to art (curiosity, desire of understanding or acceptance of
misunderstanding/perplexity), contemporary art in fact asks us to learn again to see, to
look at, to wonder, or to consider our emotions. When considering the current huge variety
of art forms, the human inability to define art, and the predominance of feelings in art, we
could say that art is today based on freedom and emotions. As the French famous writer
André Suarès said, “art is the pace of the perfect liberty”66 because art doesn’t need rules to
exist. Equally, the artist Georges Braque pointed that “art is made for disturbing” meaning
that art will always challenge human conceptions or theories about it, without avoiding it
to exist. Besides, Jillian Treacy, an essayist of the James Madison University, says that “art
doesn’t have to be beautiful because everyone’s idea of beautiful is different, not all ideas
are beautifully pleasing to the eye, and not all art is meant to be pretty”67. This has to be
tied to the idea supported by Cynthia Freeland that art cannot hold a precise definition
based on specific criteria, especially if we try to use past theories : « art doesn’t have to be a
play, a painting, garden, temple, cathedral, or opera. I doesn’t have to be beautiful or
moral. It doesn’t have to manifest personal genius or devotion to a god through luminosity,
geometry, and allegory » (p.58)68. Thus, the ideal recipe for a relevant definition about art
seems to be based on the mix between an infinite artistic creation and personal judgments.
Contemporary art shows that anything can be art, and this can constitute the major reason
of the impossibility to provide it a precise relevant definition.
The American writer on art Nancy Aiken simply says that “art can be made by any of
us. It need not result in museum-quality work; it can be only an elaboration of an ordinary
object: a hair style rather than plain hair, fashion rather than a simple covering to keep
warm”69.
66 Frédéric Gagneux, édition de textes inédits : André Suarès : les premiers écrits : documents et manuscrits , Ed.
Classiques Garnier, 2010.
67 Strawberry Lemonade. Retrieved from http://www.bdnewsarchive.com/news/odetails.php?id=85145
68 Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
69 Articles. What is Art? Retrieved from http://www.moodbook.com/history/articles/what-is-art.html
22
Finally, we can say that, obviously, anything can be art, and if it wasn’t the case until the
emergence of contemporary art, today human beings are in face of a total lack of rules in
terms of art.
As a conclusion, to sum up what have been demonstrated below, and to provide a
relevant guideline of what art have been and what it will always be about, we can
respectively quote three major artists from different periods, who strongly marked the art
world and history, to wit the French writer Stendhal, the Italian painter Modigliani and the
French artist Jean Dubuffet : “within arts, nothing is alive except what continually gives
pleasures”70 ; “the intent of art is to fight against obligations”71 ; “art does not lie down in
the bed we made for it ; it runs away as soon as we pronounce its name : what it likes is the
incognito [and its] best moments are when it forgets its name [because] real art is always
where we are not waiting for it”72.
70 Stendhal, Le Rouge et le Noir. Dir. Michel Crouzet. Ed. Lgf. Janvier 1972.
71 One of the Greatest Painters : Amedeo Modigliani 1880-1916. Retrieved from
http://www.historyofpainters.com/modigliani.htm
72 Jean Dubuffet. Positions anticulturelles, in Prospectus et tous écrits suivants, Ed. Gallimard
23
Conclusion
For ages art is above all a need for human beings and responds to a fundamental
common instinct of mankind. Art has been created by men, and still have a crucial
importance for them by being a part of the human personality. From the very moment of
the birth of art, and all along the evolution of art, human beings and art history tried to
understand it, to provide definitions, conceptions and theorizations about it. Nowadays, it
is obvious that the simple fact to ask what is art suggests that a work of art is undefinable.
Hence, the question which should remains is in fact “Why human beings try to define art?”
or “Why we ask what is art?”. Thierry de Duve, a Belgian professor of modern art theory
and contemporary art theory, explains that “art history is a desperate attempt to give a
sens to art”73. Today if specialists and artists know that the concept of art remains
undecidable, the prevalent conception of art is that a work of art is something that human
beings regard as such. This empirical definition seems to be now the only legitimate
definition of art. Art is now about everything and it is possible to say that anything can be
art. Even if current debates, like whether pornography or video games should count as art
or not, each one can decide if a work is art or not.
If art still be so important for the mankind, if men still marvel at it, and if it still
makes human beings endlessly wondering what it is, it is finally probably just because we
humans simply need it. Art simply exists and is just immortal because the human
knowledge or ability are powerless to kill it.
73 Idixa : L’histoire de l’art est une tentative désespérée de donner un sens à l’art. Retrieved from http://www.idixa.net/
Pixa/pagixa-0608270113.html
24
Sources
Books
Cynthia Freeland. But is it Art? Oxford University Press, Ed. Arthur C. Danto. 2001.
Stendhal, Le Rouge et le Noir. Dir. Michel Crouzet. Ed. Lgf. Janvier 1972.
Schopenhauer, Le monde comme Volonté et comme Représentation. Ed. PUF. 1966. p.497
Richard Dufour, Plotinus: A Bibliography 1950–2000, Ed. Leiden: E.J. Brill. 2002.
Alain Renaut. Introduction à la Critique de la faculté de juger, Aubier, 1995
Baudelaire. Exposition universelle de 1855. Ed. La Pleiade, tome 2, 1976, 9587.
Luc Decaunes. Entretiens sur les lettres et les arts, numéro spécial « Hommage à Pierre Reverdy”, Ed.
Rodez, 1961
Wassily Kandinsky. Concerning the Spiritual in Art. Ed. Kessinger Publishing, 2004
Yvon Le Scanff. Le paysage romantique et l’expérience du sublime. Editions Champ Vallon, 2007
Jean Dubuffet, Positions anticulturelles,in Prospectus et tous écrits suivants, ed. Gallimard, 1951
Arthur C. Danto. After the End of Art: Contemporary Art and the Pale of History. Princeton University
Press, 1997.
Linda Nochlin. Realism. Style and civilization. Ed. Penguin, 1971 Howard Gardner, Philosophy in a
New Key
R. G. Collingwood. Outlines of a Philosophy of Art. Ed. Preface. 1925
Frédéric Gagneux, édition de textes inédits : André Suarès : les premiers écrits : documents et
manuscrits , Ed. Classiques Garnier, 2010.
Revisited: An Appreciation of Susanne Langer, Art, Mind, and Brain: A Cognitive Approach to
Creativity, New York: Basic Books, 2001, p. 48–54
25
Merleau-Ponty, L’Oeil et l’esprit, Ed. Folio-Essais Gallimard, 1964, p.13
Kant, Critique de la faculté de juger, Analytique du Beau, 1790, Folio Essais, Gallimard
Alain Marchal, Christine Courme-Thubert, Philosophie, Magnard,2004
Francois Cavallier, Le manuel de philosophie, ellipses, 2003
Proust, Le temps retrouvé, Ed. Folio Gallimard, 1954, p.34Klee,Théorie de l’art moderne, Ed. Médiations
Denoël, 1964, p.34
Websites
Oscar Wilde and the creation of London Fog. Retrieved 8, November, 2010 from
http://aestheticstoday.blogspot.com/2008/09/oscar-wilde-and-creation-of-london-fog.html
L’oeuvre d’art . Retrieved 20, November, 2010 from
http://www.idixa.net/Pixa/pagixa-0801012159.html
Kenneth Baker. AFTER THE END OF ART. Retrieved 5, December, 2010 from
http://articles.sfgate.com/1997-02-23/books/17743948_1_art-critic-arthur-c-danto-true-art
Jean-Pierre Zarader. Malraux et Goya : Saturne, le destin, l’art et Goya. Retrieved 13, November,
2010 from
http://www.philopsis.fr/spip.php?article184
Art History : a preliminary hand book. Retrieved 17, November, 2010 from
http://web.ubc.ca/okanagan/creative/links/arthistory/What_is_Art_.html
Ellen Dissanayake approach. Retrieved 20, December, 2010 from
http://denisdutton.com/dissanayake_review.htm
Strawberry Lemonade. Retrieved 22, December, 2010 from
http://www.bdnewsarchive.com/news/odetails.php?id=85145
Articles. What is Art? Retrieved 17, December, 2010 from
http://www.moodbook.com/history/articles/what-is-art.html
One of the Greatest Painters : Amedeo Modigliani 1880-1916. Retrieved 23, December, 2010 from
http://www.historyofpainters.com/modigliani.htm
Idixa : L’histoire de l’art est une tentative désespérée de donner un sens à l’art. Retrieved 28,
Novemeber, 2010 from http://www.idixa.net/Pixa/pagixa-0608270113.html
26
Art Contemporain. Retrieved 9, December, 2010 from http://www.artcontemporain.freesurf.fr/
Qu’est-ce que l’art contemporain? Retrieved 6, December, 2010 from http://www.lillegrandpalaisleblog.
com/quest-ce-que-lart-contemporain/
Hume aesthetics. Retrieved 26, December, 2010 from http://www.illc.uva.nl/~seop/entries/humeaesthetics/
Hume and Kant theories about Art. Retrieved 4 January 2011 from
http://www.mnstate.edu/gracyk/courses/phil%20of%20art/hume_and_kant.htm
Les maîtres du Street Art. Retrieved 20, December, 2010 from
http://www.suite101.fr/content/streetart-3-quelques-maitres-du-genre-a9041
What is Art? Retrieved 28, December, 2010 from
http://web.ubc.ca/okanagan/creative/links/arthistory/What_is_Art_.html
Plato : Art definition. Retrieved 16, December, 2010 from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/artdefinition/#
TraDef
Graffiti. Retrieved 18, December, 2010 from http://www.graffiti.org/faq/graf.def.html
Graffiti as an art form. Retrieved 28 December, 2010 from http://www.artsz.org/graffiti-as-anart-
form/
What is art? What is an artist? Retrieved December, 2010 from
http://www.arthistory.sbc.edu/artartists/artartiststoday.html
27
