| |||||||||||||||
 Trade In this Item for up to £2.35
Get an extra £5 when you trade in books worth £10 or more until June 30, 2012. Trade in Philosophy of Art: A Contemporary Introduction (Routledge Contemporary Introductions to Philosophy) for an Amazon.co.uk gift card of up to £2.35, which you can then spend on millions of items across the site. Trade-in values may vary (terms apply). Find more products eligible for trade-in.
|
Frequently Bought Together
Product details
|
More About the Author
Product Description
Review
"The book's strength is its concise and straightforward deciphering of a variety of representations in a dense manner."
-Choice, May 2000
-Choice, May 2000
Product Description
Philosophy of Art is a textbook for undergraduate students interested in the topic of philosophical aesthetics.
It introduces the techniques of analytic philosophy as well as key topics such as the representational theory of art, formalism, neo-formalism, aesthetic theories of art, neo-Wittgensteinism, the Institutional Theory of Art. as well as historical approaches to the nature of art.
Throughout, abstract philosophical theories are illustrated by examples of both traditional and contemporary art including frequent reference to the avant-garde in this way enriching the readers understanding of art theory as well as the appreciation of art.
Unique features of the textbook are:
* chapter summaries
* summaries of major theories of art and suggested analyses of the important categories used when talking and thinking of art
* annotated suggested readings at the ends of chapters.
Also available in this series:
Epistemology Pb: 0-415-13043-3: £12.99
Ethics Pb: 0-415-15625-4: £11.99
Metaphysics Pb: 0-415-14034-X: £12.99
Philosophy of Mind Pb: 0-415-13060-3: £11.99
Philosophy of Religion Pb: 0-415-13214-2: £12.99
It introduces the techniques of analytic philosophy as well as key topics such as the representational theory of art, formalism, neo-formalism, aesthetic theories of art, neo-Wittgensteinism, the Institutional Theory of Art. as well as historical approaches to the nature of art.
Throughout, abstract philosophical theories are illustrated by examples of both traditional and contemporary art including frequent reference to the avant-garde in this way enriching the readers understanding of art theory as well as the appreciation of art.
Unique features of the textbook are:
* chapter summaries
* summaries of major theories of art and suggested analyses of the important categories used when talking and thinking of art
* annotated suggested readings at the ends of chapters.
Also available in this series:
Epistemology Pb: 0-415-13043-3: £12.99
Ethics Pb: 0-415-15625-4: £11.99
Metaphysics Pb: 0-415-14034-X: £12.99
Philosophy of Mind Pb: 0-415-13060-3: £11.99
Philosophy of Religion Pb: 0-415-13214-2: £12.99
Inside This Book
(Learn More)
First Sentence
The earliest known theories of art in Western philosophy were proposed by Plato and his student Aristotle. Read the first page
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index
The earliest known theories of art in Western philosophy were proposed by Plato and his student Aristotle. Read the first page
Explore More
Concordance
Browse Sample PagesConcordance
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index
Suggested Tags from Similar Products(What's this?)Be the first one to add a relevant tag (keyword that's strongly related to this product)
|
Sell a Digital Version of This Book in the Kindle Store
If you are a publisher or author and hold the digital rights to a book, you can sell a digital version of it in our Kindle Store.
Learn more
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
4 of 12 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback|Amazon Verified Purchase
This book, written by a philosophy professor, is filled with circular reasoning that would be spotted by a ten year old.
For instance, the author rejects the representational theory of art with the argument, that some art isn't representational. Therefore, the representational theory must be wrong. Easy, right?
Wrong. The whole point of the representational theory is that non-representational art *isn't* art. Carroll's argument is therefore a non sequitur. Essentially, he just says: "YES, IT IS". To which the representationalist will respond: "NO, IT ISN'T". Quite a debate!
Carroll assumes what needs to be proven: that the avantgarde is art. Duchamp's ready-mades and "Two Minutes of Silence" are art. Why? No idea. Because Carroll and modernist art critics say so, presumably. Therefore, definitions of art which would exclude Duchamp and the Silent Guy cannot be correct. QED.
That's an argument?
When the chips are down, Carroll cannot even present a definition of his own, at least not a coherent one. Carroll believes that design isn't art. Why not? Many people would disagree. But perhaps they aren't part of the cognoscenti Art Circle. He further believes that a traffic sign used as a wall decoration wouldn't be art. Again, why not?
What is art? Perhaps the question cannot be given a clear answer. And then, perhaps it can. How come the public after 100 years of modernist indoctrination still doesn't consider the modernist monstrosities to be "art"? Carroll implies that such people are simply silly and philistine. Another possibility is that modern and postmodern art simply doesn't appeal to some kind of aesthetic, symbolic or ritual instincts deeply embedded in our psyches. In plain English: no, Noël, it really isn't "art" after all!
For instance, the author rejects the representational theory of art with the argument, that some art isn't representational. Therefore, the representational theory must be wrong. Easy, right?
Wrong. The whole point of the representational theory is that non-representational art *isn't* art. Carroll's argument is therefore a non sequitur. Essentially, he just says: "YES, IT IS". To which the representationalist will respond: "NO, IT ISN'T". Quite a debate!
Carroll assumes what needs to be proven: that the avantgarde is art. Duchamp's ready-mades and "Two Minutes of Silence" are art. Why? No idea. Because Carroll and modernist art critics say so, presumably. Therefore, definitions of art which would exclude Duchamp and the Silent Guy cannot be correct. QED.
That's an argument?
When the chips are down, Carroll cannot even present a definition of his own, at least not a coherent one. Carroll believes that design isn't art. Why not? Many people would disagree. But perhaps they aren't part of the cognoscenti Art Circle. He further believes that a traffic sign used as a wall decoration wouldn't be art. Again, why not?
What is art? Perhaps the question cannot be given a clear answer. And then, perhaps it can. How come the public after 100 years of modernist indoctrination still doesn't consider the modernist monstrosities to be "art"? Carroll implies that such people are simply silly and philistine. Another possibility is that modern and postmodern art simply doesn't appeal to some kind of aesthetic, symbolic or ritual instincts deeply embedded in our psyches. In plain English: no, Noël, it really isn't "art" after all!
Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)
Amazon.com:
5 reviews
9 of 9 people found the following review helpful
A Great Introduction
16 Mar 2008
Format:Paperback
For the past few years, I've been looking for a good introduction to the philosophy of art. Noël Carroll provides this missing book.
There are several guides, companions and anthologies. But none of them was able to provide me with a clear and elegant tool to tackle this subject. This lack of a reference manual is specifically acute in my own country, France, as the aesthetics analytic tradition is not part of the basic Philosophy curriculum.
Most books in the field are focusing on the philosophy works of Goodman, Danto and Cavell. I do see why an academic would consider these works to be crucial to the understanding of contemporary aesthetics discussions. But my impression is that the mention of these authors only turns off students.
Mr. Carroll's books focuses on very basic problems and on one basic question: what is art about? Is it about representation? Or expression? Or form? - This choice of simplicity makes this book the only available introduction to a very exciting field.
I do not think the book requires any philosophy background - so it could also be of a great interest for a wider audience.
The only thing I miss is a more comprehensive discussion of the question of "intention", as it is the problem that surfaces during most discussions on aesthetics issues. I guess the author had to keep the book short and focused.
There are several guides, companions and anthologies. But none of them was able to provide me with a clear and elegant tool to tackle this subject. This lack of a reference manual is specifically acute in my own country, France, as the aesthetics analytic tradition is not part of the basic Philosophy curriculum.
Most books in the field are focusing on the philosophy works of Goodman, Danto and Cavell. I do see why an academic would consider these works to be crucial to the understanding of contemporary aesthetics discussions. But my impression is that the mention of these authors only turns off students.
Mr. Carroll's books focuses on very basic problems and on one basic question: what is art about? Is it about representation? Or expression? Or form? - This choice of simplicity makes this book the only available introduction to a very exciting field.
I do not think the book requires any philosophy background - so it could also be of a great interest for a wider audience.
The only thing I miss is a more comprehensive discussion of the question of "intention", as it is the problem that surfaces during most discussions on aesthetics issues. I guess the author had to keep the book short and focused.
2 of 3 people found the following review helpful
An attempt at an analytical definition of 'art'
1 May 2009
Format:Paperback
This book is primarily concerned with figuring out what makes an object a work of art. The strategy adopted here attempts to find necessary and sufficient conditions which an object must satisfy in order for it to properly be called a work of art. Carroll considers several different traditions which offer answers to this question. Most of the book proceeds by way of finding counterexamples to the proposed definition. While engaging, this book won't be very congenial for philosophers who deny a definitional view of concepts or who deny analyticity. If you are one of these, the project will be doomed to failure at the outset. He does consider family resemblence, but quickly dismisses it. However, you may find value in the later chapters, which consider whether pure fiat confers art-status on an object. Good intro though with plentiful references to works of art.
18 of 29 people found the following review helpful
Beach Reading
21 Aug 2002
Format:Hardcover
This is what I packed to the lake this summer. The suspense of following art thinking from verisimitude to conceptualism. The romance of potent examples from the history of art! The tragedy of the Fall of the aesthetic enterprise. The hope of uncovering the as-yet unsolved mysteries in defining a work of Art. All told with, if not humor, at least honsety.
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
Customer Discussions
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
Listmania!
|
|
Look for similar items by category
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
- I am the Author, and I want to comment on my book.
- I am the Publisher, and I want to comment on this book.
|
