Consciousness, Literature and the Arts
Archive
Volume 4 Number 3, December 2003
_______________________________________________________________
Warburton, Nigel. The Art Question. London and New York, Routledge, 2002. 144 pages; ISBN: 0415174902 pb, 0415174899 hbk. HB: $65.00; PB: $14.95
Reviewed by
Pondering
the thematic diversity characterized as art in our complex world, it is not
surprising that questions about what art is arise.
In The Art Question, Nigel Warbuton explains that the knowledge that
answers to the art question are evasive led him to write this concise book.
Divided into six sections (an Introduction and five chapters), Warburton
initiates the study with the formalist account of Clive Bell, who argued that
art of all ages has a common denominator — significant form.
This first section is then compared with R. G. Collingwood's view that
the common core of art is its peculiar form of emotional expression.
Thirdly, drawing on Wittgenstein's views on the nature of language,
Warburton examines the argument that art defies definition because it is the
type of concept that cannot be defined in terms of common denominators.
The fourth chapter engages with the Institutional Theory, considering the
degree to which art is what is designated art by the art world.
In the final chapter the author offers his own view.
Throughout,
the arguments presented are easy to follow.
To his credit, Warburton never wastes words and draws on diverse images
to underscore each point. Admittedly I found the visual material illustrative.
The book, nonetheless, struck me as somewhat narrowly conceived overall.
Essentially the arguments about what art is were contextualized in quite
recent terms. Beginning with Clive
Bell's 1914 Art, the exposition
essentially confines the roots of the question to views put forth in the
twentieth and twenty-first centuries. So
while the works discussed range from Cezanne's nineteenth century Lac
d'Annecy and The Wilton Diptych
(c. 1395-9) to recent pieces such as Tracey Emin's 1999 My Bed, the theories presented cover a very restricted trajectory of
historical time and geography. Within
this range Warburton does offer a concise summary of the ideas he presents,
including explanations of where a particular point of view falls short in fully
answering the question of art. I
agreed with his conclusion that all of the recent philosophical attempts to
define art have proved inadequate to some extent.
Yet
I was disappointed with his response to the inadequacies of the theories of the
first four chapters. Seeking to
rectify the lack of definitive conclusions, Warbuton defines art as indefinable
on the grounds that this is the most plausible position given the evidence.
This struck me more as a device than a conclusion.
It offered little to expand my perceptions of the question and does
little to elevate the overviews presented in the earlier chapters.
I would have preferred some effort to look for doors that have not yet
been opened. In a world in which
artists increasingly work in a cross cultural environment and employ media that
moves beyond traditional boundaries, much could be added to the limited picture
of art presented. Rather than
simply melding visual art with philosophy Warburton could have asked about art
in light of how artists of today treat sound, vision, and performance as
cooperative sensory tools. This
enlarged perspective might suggest a more broadly based approach that could
reconfigure the question. In
addition, fields like archeology have enlarged our definitions of what
constitutes art through building an awareness of cultural artifacts.
Sifting through the ways these objects teach all about societies and
their beliefs perhaps adds a complexity to art that exists outside of the
theoretical parameters Warburton summarizes.
In
summary, Warburton's clear and easy to read style is worthy of praise.
Even with its limitations The Art
Question is a valuable guide to debates about how we might define art.
To be sure, many art historians, philosophers, and critics look at art
through the lens he chooses. Still
this compact book is most likely to appeal to those interested in simply
juxtaposing the various Eurocentric debates about art in the twentieth and
twenty-first centuries than offering insight into the larger art question.
It would no doubt be a useful book for students seeking a quick overview
of more recent philosophical responses to the debates included.
The somewhat chronological framework of the book supports the view that
conclusions alter as a culture changes and Warburton seems to suggest this.
Yet, even with the evolutionary implication that is made through the
chronological presentation, the book seems strangely dated in our global
community.