Art Interpretation and Artist's Intention

Overview

• Discussion on how much the artist's intention should affect interpretation of their work.
• Philosophical debate on the topic with no clear consensus.

Key Approaches

Intentional Fallacy

• Proponents: W.K. Wimsett and Monroe Beardsley
• Core Argument: Artist's intention is irrelevant to interpretation.
  • Art should be appreciated for its qualities alone.
  • Art is like dessert; the chef's intentions don't affect its taste.
• Implication: Multiple interpretations are valid, including those unintended by the artist.

Against Intentional Fallacy

• Proponents: Stephen Knapp and Walter Ben Michaels
• Core Argument: Artist's intended meaning is the only valid interpretation.
  • Without intentional creation, art loses meaning.
  • Example: Poetry on the sand is meaningless if not intentionally created.

Middle Ground

• Proponent: Noel Carroll
• Core Argument: Artist's intentions are an important part of interpretation.
  • Comparable to understanding intentions in a conversation.
  • Example: Giving a lighter when someone asks for a match, assuming intention to light a cigarette.

Conclusion

• Art interpretation is subjective and complex.
• People may lean towards different ends of the spectrum based on personal beliefs.
• The debate continues with no definitive answer.

Additional Information

• TED-Ed program for student voices and ideas. Opportunity to explore more on their platform.