Abstract
One of today's most influential definitions of the concept of the work of art comes from the American philosopher and art critic Arthur Danto. Danto says, in order to be a work of art, an artefact must (1) be about something and (2) embody its meaning. Many authors have criticized this definition, one of those being Noël Carroll, who gives examples of objects that are not works of art but meet the requirements of Danto's definition. One possible answer to this criticism is offered in this essay. It offers an understanding of the objects from Carroll's examples (and similar objects) as aesthetized, i.e. specifically shaped to partially cause an aesthetic reaction. Taking this into account, the entire area of human productivity is shown as a continuum within which some objects carry "more" or "less" aesthetic quality.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
