The Definition of Art Before (and After) its Indefinability

Abstract

In this paper I discuss some proposals about the definability of an (Weitz, Danto, Dickie, Levinson) in order to conclude that all of them imply some form of "institutionalism", and of "procedural definitions" which lack the interest and the applicability of authentic definitions. I propose a strategy consisting of giving up the difficulties that arise from the present situation of visual arts. This strategy can only be rejected if we suppose that the last manifestations of an reveal a difficulty also present in former an. But this would be so if a valid definition for all that previous history were imposible. I propose, then, a conception of art as a historical process which neither possesses an essence nor develops from a program, but develops as a singular, identifiable entity, and not as mere succession or conglomerate. I discuss, then, the theoretical conditions required by this hypothesis and the historical facts that support it.