We will explore the nature of art, compare traditional and modern approaches to art theory, and discuss how the definition of art has expanded and different forms of art have been recognized as new genres.
When asked what art is, we might say something like Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa or Beethoven’s symphony or ballet Swan Lake. And we wouldn’t be wrong. But what would the answer be if the question were to ask what are the properties that characterize them all as works of art, the essence of art?
In fact, it is natural to think that there must be some property that is common to all of the things in a group called by the same name, otherwise what would be the point of calling them by the same name? These questions go beyond mere theoretical curiosity and require deep reflection on how art works in human life and why it matters. Trying to identify the nature of art is also an important foundation for understanding its meaning and value.
The search for the essence of art has also been guided by this assumption. Thus, the traditional Western view that art is imitation, or that art is the expression of emotion, or that art is form, have all been considered answers to the question of what art is. But if they all compete as the correct answer, which one is really the essence of art?
To answer this question, a variety of additional discussions about the function or social role of art have emerged. Claims that art acts as a catalyst for social change, or that it is an important element in shaping individual identity, have also arisen from attempts to define the nature of art. These discussions suggest that art is more than just a hobby or entertainment, but is deeply involved in fundamental aspects of human existence and social structure.
In the 20th century, Wittgenstein’s philosophy provided an opportunity to approach this question in a different way. Wittgenstein uses the example of a game. Suppose someone sees the essential nature of a game as competition, counterexamples will soon follow. For example, war has the property of competition, but it is not a game. On the other hand, there are games that are not competitions. An example would be playing cards alone in your free time. In this way, it seems impossible to find a single essence common to all games. However, according to Wittgenstein, this is exactly the correct perception of the concept of a game.
According to Wittgenstein, a game is not an essence, but a concept that is established by the similarities between things that are called games. Let’s call the similarity found in this case “family similarity”. As members of a family, my mother, me, and my brother resemble each other in certain ways. However, this does not mean that there is a single feature that all three of us have in common. Similarly, a rope made of twisted threads is not made because there is a single thread that runs through it from beginning to end, but because it is made up of a series of short threads. In this way, even threads that do not meet at all can be threads in the same rope.
The aestheticist Weitz argues that the same is true of the concept of art. For him, art is an “open concept” that has only family resemblances. An open concept is one whose borders are open enough to allow a given object to become a new member of the concept on the basis of its resemblance to some of the members already in the concept. Therefore, traditional theories of art, such as representational or formalism, make the mistake of looking for an essence where there is none. According to Weitz, expression and form are not the essence of art, but rather the criteria of good art. He argues that viewing art with an open mind is the most appropriate way to treat art, which is supposed to be infinitely creative.
This perspective has expanded the discussion about the definition and scope of art. This is why things that were not considered art in the past are now often accepted as new art genres. For example, it is this open concept that allows new forms of art, such as street art or digital art, to be integrated into the traditional concept of art. This approach recognizes the infinite possibilities of art and allows us to look forward to what the future holds.
