Within the visual arts and in art history, the term conceptualism” has acquired a that means distinct from its usage in other fields such as philosophy. While conceptual art in its purest kind would possibly arguably be restricted to works produced throughout these five or six years practically half a century ago, it appears overly slender – actually from a philosophical perspective – to limit our inquiry to works produced during that interval alone.
Motion pictures will not be focused on being colonised by the plastic or fantastic arts, positive arts will not be enthusiastic about turning into another distribution level for movies. The main philosophical query highlighted by conceptual artwork in this context, then, is the following: ‘Does artwork really must be aesthetic, and, if so, in what sense?’.
Whether one comes out of that investigation embracing a broader – albeit maybe vaguer – set of ideas and tools than one began off with, or whether one considers oneself pressured to abandon any hope of anything however very particular theories of art, artist, and inventive expertise, conceptual art obliges us to think about the place we stand on these issues.
It should come as no shock, then, that conceptual art could cause frustration or vexation – to lift tough and generally even annoying questions is precisely what conceptual artwork generally aspires to do. In reacting strongly to conceptual art we’re, in some important sense, playing proper into its fingers.
Six Years: The Dematerialization of the Artwork Object 1966-1972, New York: Praeger. I feel his thought of what conceptual art stands for could be very intriguing and humble. Now, even if it is granted that art needn’t be aesthetic, it is nonetheless possible to carry that conceptual artwork doesn’t qualify as good artwork because it doesn’t (aim to) yield aesthetic experiences.