Art as viewed by Philosophy

Over the past few decades, the philosophy of art

has enjoyed a remarkable revival. More and more
studies are being devoted to the philosophical or
theoretical probing into questions about the
meaning of art. This gradual but steady expansion
in the field also suggests a broadening group of
potential readers. Indeed, the present situation may
perhaps be characterized as not simply a revival
but as an unprecedented breakthrough. There are
three major developments that help explain this.
Firstly, today's increased importance of philosophy
of art is due to modern art itself.
Revolutionary avant-garde movements, attempting to transcend existing norms
in art as early as around 1910, unleashed a process that has challenged any
supposedly self-evident notions of art ever since. This process still continues
today. Modern art is constantly pushing the boundaries of the “artistic”,
seeking and providing new answers to the question of what art really is. Not
surprisingly, every new movement is accompanied by a theoretical discourse to
justify its premises. In the art world, the permanent drive for renewal has urged
more and more artists to turn to philosophy to support their concepts of art.
Artists have sometimes taken this approach to such extremes as to
identify thinking about art with art itself, as has happened in conceptual art. In
any case, this explains the growing significance of art philosophy to the
development of art.
– Art is an imitation for Plato, the work of the artisan is to copy or imitate
the idea, eternal, immutable, for one thing. The artist proceeds by
imitation but also what copy is the sensible thing is to say an already
imperfect reproduction of the Idea. Instead of approaching the truth, it
increases the distance that separates her.

– The Judgement of Taste: Kant, is the art of reflective judgment

opposing the ruling factor. The latter is used in scientific discourse and is
to apply concepts (universal) prior to singular objects. Reflective
Judgement (eg, “How beautiful”) may instead assume universality. The
beautiful is disinterested (the utility and fun do not take part) it pleases
universally without a concept (universal subjective) well, it’s a finality
without end (it shows in order, a plan, but does nothing beyond itself)
– The Science of Art: Hegel criticizes Kant for having retained a subjective
point of view on art. But a science of art is possible in that art is a
production of the spirit (Geist), it is not unlike the individual
consciousness. The science of art is historical, because the idea of ​art
unfolds itself in history until the modern era that marks the end of art.

– The powers of the imagination: Delacroix and Baudelaire asserts the

primacy of the imagination (constructive) in art. The primary subject of art
is not nature but the artist himself, the depths of his soul, emotions, etc..
Alain critique this view by stating that the imagination is an illusion and
that nothing is given, in the human psyche, an emotional disorder. Art is
the externalization, the act of ordering and discipline of the passions.
 – The artist as a work of art: For Nietzsche, the aesthetic categories are
metaphysical categories. The figure of Dionysus, which is essential to
tragedy, is what is terrifying to disproportionate in nature. Nature, only
an artistic vision can support and embellish, is the power of
metamorphosis, becoming, creation and destruction. The artist, one man
(or superman) is the one that truly manages to order the chaos of
impulses that inhabit it. Aesthetics is an “Applied Physiology”.

– Art and technology: The question of the future of art in an age

where technology acquires a dominant position is essential.
Benjamin shows as well as the reproducibility of art
(photography, for example), they tend to lose their aura, their
sacred nature.
 – The work of art and the tool: For Heidegger the traditional conception of
the natural thing, the tool and the work of art as composed of matter and
form comes from human activity in manufacturing which a material is worked
to fit a function, and thus becomes a tool. But daily use tools mask their
being, their truth because the tool is effective only in strict as it is forgotten.
The work of art is what reveals the being of the tool, membership in a human
world and a primitive nature (the Earth).