Saturday, November 20, 2010
Dickie
Dickie had a theory that screamed inclusion. He named off a number of people who were considered to be in the art world including art philosophers, artists, exhibit owners, and even news reporters. Even after naming every person who might be considered part of the art world in some way or the other he even included "and others." He then goes on to say that even people who just consider themselves part of the art world are part of the art world because considering themselves makes it so. This sparked a conversation in class whether or not people could speak on a subject without being classically or academically trained. The example of a quantum physics professor speaking psychology was brought up. You would not take their opinion too seriously aside the fact that they are an intellectual. They do not know about psychology, they know about quantum physics. But can they not speak on the subject of psychology by simply things they observe and witness in everyday life. Aren't we all psychologists when we over analyze and pick apart peoples actions. When we explain someones behavior or actions on something in their childhood or the way they think. Is this not psychology? I think this is what Dickie was getting at in his extremely inclusive theory. While we are not all great artists or have pondered and ruminated on the great works of art and artist of our times, we still can look at a piece of art or read a book or listen to a song and know whether we like or not. Whether it is pleasing or not. Whether it is aesthetically pleasing and well put together. Every art theory we have read has dealt with this. What parts of art makes it so it is pleasing to the public and seen as art and therefore art. If the public's opinion does not matter simply because they are not artist, then we would not have art. So therefore, we are all a part of most subjects. Everyday in our lives, we think and interact with an array of different subjects and areas and we know them inside and out. Is there anything we are truly ignorant of or never come in contact with or have no experience based knowledge with?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
You're right; our everyday experience with art (Dewey) places us within the circle of those who are at least minimally qualified (Dickie?) to comment on the "artworld."
ReplyDelete