Art Interpretation and Artist's Intentions

Introduction

• Personal experience at an art exhibit with conflicting interpretations of a painting.
• Explores the relevance of an artist's intentions on viewer interpretation.

The Debate on Artistic Intention

• W.K. Wimsatt and Monroe Beardsley (Mid-20th Century)

  • Argued artistic intention is irrelevant (Intentional Fallacy).
  • Two main points:
    1. Artists are often deceased or unavailable for clarification on their intentions.
    2. Intentions distract from the work's qualities itself.
  • Analogy: Art compared to dessert; enjoyment is based on flavor/texture, not the chef's intentions.

• Subjectivity of Interpretation

  • Different interpretations can resonate with different viewers.
  • Example: Silver dots can symbolize fairies, stars, or pollutants.

Counterargument to Intentional Fallacy

• Steven Knapp and Walter Benn Michaels
  • Rejected the Intentional Fallacy.
  • Argued that an artist's intended meaning is the only valid interpretation.
  • Example: Marks in the sand interpreted as poetry lose meaning if they are a coincidence.

Middle Ground Perspective

• Noel Carroll (Contemporary Philosopher)
  • Suggested intentions are relevant, similar to understanding a speaker's motivations in a conversation.
  • Example: Handing a lighter instead of a match based on the intention of lighting a cigarette.

Conclusion

• Questions posed to reflect on personal views:
  • Do you agree with Wimsatt and Beardsley that enjoyment is based solely on the art itself?
  • Or do you believe that an artist’s plans and motivations are integral to the meaning of their work?
• Acknowledgement of the complexity of artistic interpretation without a definitive answer.