Art Interpretation The 2010 Richard Wollheim Memorial Lecture
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4158035 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Nicola Carroll (0000-0001-8344-1220, City University of New York, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2011 |
| Volume | 51 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 117-135 |
| Publication date | 2011-04-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The British Journal of Aesthetics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0007-0904 • E-ISSN: 1468-2842 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1093/aesthj/ayr006 |
| OpenAlex | W2321841316 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
The topic of this lecture is the interpretation of art, a subject that Richard Wollheim examined not only from a philosophical perspective; it was also an activity he practised with immense penetration, most notably perhaps in his magisterial opus Painting as an Art.1 Although Wollheim had a great deal to say about art interpretation, his name, unfortunately, seems to have dropped out of recent debates concerning interpretation. In this lecture, I would like to reintroduce him to the discussion. Specifically, I will attempt to enlist him as a fellow-traveller in the approach to the interpretation of art that I call modest, actual intentionalism. Also, with Wollheim's assistance, I will introduce what might be labelled the ‘Linguistic Fallacy’, the charge that it is an error to attempt to model all art interpretation on linguistic models. You might think of the Linguistic Fallacy as the actual intentionalist's antidote to the vaunted Intentional Fallacy
Art · Art history · Epistemology · Fallacy · Interpretation (philosophy · Linguistics · Painting · Subject (documents · Computer Science · Philosophy · Philosophy and Theoretical Science
| Citations per year | 0.36 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2012 - 2026 (15) |
| Highly cited | No |