Comments on: ‘Philosophers on Art’

By: Jeremy Miller

Jeremy Miller — Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:25:05 +0000

“philosophers on art should get no more credence than they give artists on philosophy … ”

So much for an interdisciplinary approach.

I have to agree with Jonathan. When thoughtful and intelligent people write about a topic you love (and is the foundation of your professional activity), even if it is out of their primary field, it is worth paying attention.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 23:15:32 +0000

I sometimes think we give too much credence to philosophers’ writings on art -if for no other reason than that most of the time these thinkers are writing about beauty and aesthetics, not necessarily art, though they project ideas of beauty onto art. The history of art and the history of beauty are not the same thing. Eco wrote about this in the introduction to his History of Beauty.

By: Jon Lackman

Jon Lackman — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 17:59:55 +0000

Regarding the idea that “words about art have nothing to do with art,” I have to disagree. No art arises from vision alone. Artists are inevitably affected by their reading of and conversation with friends, patrons, critics, historians, and theorists and psychoanalysts, at times. So too is the artwork’s reception affected by language.

By: Jon Lackman

Jon Lackman — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 10:56:39 +0000

I’m not opposed to philosophers or psychoanalysts writing on art and have enjoyed some of both at times. For me Kant and Barthes have been particularly stimulating. But there seems to be something about the anthology format that makes them seem particularly impenetrable and unlovely. Remove their words from their original context and something essential is lost — particularly when an entire book is being reduced to a short excerpt. Similarly, I rarely become enamored with a poem upon finding it in an anthology, or even in the poet’s own collected poems — the original chapbooks are the only way to go for me.

By: gregorylent

gregorylent — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 08:45:42 +0000

philosophers on art should get no more credence than they give artists on philosophy …

words about art have nothing to do with art

By: H Niyazi

H Niyazi — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 01:07:09 +0000

There’s one thing worse than hearing a psychoanalyst prattle on about art – a philosopher prattling on about art!!

Hopefully this won’t dissuade actual Historians, or even Art Scholars like Andrew Graham Dixon and Martin Kemp from keeping up their great work.