Art by Proxy

R. Yanal
{"title":"Art by Proxy","authors":"R. Yanal","doi":"10.1093/jaac/kpad022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Cultural theories of art were developed to account for the arthood of nonaesthetic and nonimitative artworks. Historical theories such as those proposed by Jerrold Levinson, James Carney, and Noël Carroll fail to account for the arthood of first art and ethnological objects, as does the disjunctive theory of Stephen Davies. An institutional (artworld-based) theory, such as George Dickie’s 1977 version, can account for the arthood of art made within the context of an artworld. But what of objects that are art now but were not made in an artworld context? I add a supplement to Dickie’s institutional theory: the concept of art by proxy.","PeriodicalId":220991,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jaac/kpad022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Cultural theories of art were developed to account for the arthood of nonaesthetic and nonimitative artworks. Historical theories such as those proposed by Jerrold Levinson, James Carney, and Noël Carroll fail to account for the arthood of first art and ethnological objects, as does the disjunctive theory of Stephen Davies. An institutional (artworld-based) theory, such as George Dickie’s 1977 version, can account for the arthood of art made within the context of an artworld. But what of objects that are art now but were not made in an artworld context? I add a supplement to Dickie’s institutional theory: the concept of art by proxy.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
代理艺术
艺术文化理论的发展是为了解释非审美和非模仿艺术作品的优越性。历史理论,如Jerrold Levinson, James Carney和Noël Carroll提出的理论,未能解释第一艺术和民族学对象的重要性,Stephen Davies的分离理论也是如此。一种制度性的(基于艺术界的)理论,比如乔治·迪基(George Dickie) 1977年的版本,可以解释在艺术界背景下创作的艺术的价值。但是,那些现在是艺术品但不是在艺术世界背景下制作的物品呢?我在迪基的制度理论基础上增加了一个补充:代理艺术的概念。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Disagreement in Aesthetics and Ethics: Against the Received Image The 2023 Richard Wollheim Memorial Lecture Hegel and the Present of Art’s Past Character Perplexing Plots: Popular Storytelling and the Poetics of Murder Aesthetics in Biodiversity Conservation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1