The Institutional Theory of Art: a Concept by George Dickie

George Dickie's Institutional Theory of Art, as outlined in his 1984 paper "The New Institutional Theory of Art," offers a revolutionary perspective on how art is defined and recognized. Instead of focusing solely on intrinsic qualities of the artwork itself, Dickie proposes that art is primarily defined by its position within an "institutional framework"—namely, the context of the 'art world.' This framework is composed of various individuals such as curators, artists, critics, and educators who collectively determine what is considered art by engaging with the work in a knowledgeable and informed manner.

Defining 'Art World'

Dickie's concept of the 'art world' is critical to understanding his theory. He suggests that a piece of art is not simply defined by its visual or thematic characteristics but by its presentation to a public that has the capacity to appreciate and evaluate it. This public, or the 'art world,' consists of individuals who possess a level of insight and expertise about the medium, enabling them to fulfill roles that are crucial to the recognition and appreciation of art. Furthermore, Dickie acknowledges that multiple 'art worlds' exist, each specific to different artistic mediums, implying that the recognition of art can vary widely depending on the audience and context. This suggests that art is not a static concept but a dynamic one that evolves with its audience.

Power Dynamics: Creators vs. Art World

Dickie's theory places significant emphasis on the relationship between the artist and the art world. The artist is seen as one pillar of the institutional framework, consciously creating art with the intent of its consumption by the art world public. However, this raises questions about the autonomy of the artist and the potential power imbalance, where the value and recognition of art are contingent upon its acceptance by the art world. This dynamic is further explored by critics like Jerrold Levinson, who, in his paper "Defining Art Historically," challenges Dickie's notion by suggesting that art can exist independently of an audience. Levinson posits that art can be a deeply personal creation, made solely for the artist's own contemplation, thus broadening the definition of art to include private expressions that do not rely on public validation.

Debate Through Duchamp's Readymades

The ongoing debate between Dickie's and Levinson's theories is epitomized in the works of Marcel Duchamp. Duchamp's readymades, such as "Fountain" and "Prelude to a Broken Arm," serve as focal points in discussions about the nature of art. Dickie uses Duchamp's work to illustrate the importance of the institutional framework, arguing that the status of these objects as art is reliant on their recognition by the art world. Without the institutional context, a urinal remains a urinal, not a groundbreaking piece of art. Levinson, however, suggests that Duchamp's intention and appropriation of these objects are what transform them into art, highlighting the role of the artist's intent over the institutional recognition. This invites a broader interpretation of art, suggesting that art can be anything that is intended and appropriated as such by its creator.

Conclusion

In summary, George Dickie's Institutional Theory of Art provides a compelling framework for understanding how art is defined and recognized within societal structures. Yet, the theory also invites critical examination and debate, as seen in Levinson's counterarguments and the analysis of Duchamp's works. By recognizing the dual roles of the artist and the art world, the theory underscores the complexity of art as both a creation and a social construct. To enhance the depth and understanding of the theory, future discussions could incorporate perspectives from diverse art forms and cultures, further exploring how varied 'art worlds' contribute to the rich tapestry of artistic expression. By doing so, we can continue to expand our appreciation of art and its multifaceted role in society.

Did you like this example?

243

13