Theories of three conceptual artists : a critique and comparison

Cardinal Scholar

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor Spoerner, Thomas M. en_US
dc.contributor.author Morton, Luise H. en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2011-06-03T19:29:17Z
dc.date.available 2011-06-03T19:29:17Z
dc.date.created 1985 en_US
dc.date.issued 1985
dc.identifier LD2489.Z64 1985 .M67 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://cardinalscholar.bsu.edu/handle/handle/178849
dc.description.abstract Conceptual Art emerged as an international, avant-garde art movement in the mid-60s. Attacking the prevailing aesthetics of modern art, Conceptual artists claim that art lies not in the object itself but in the artist's idea or intention. Their asserted goals have been to combine theory with art and to eliminate the need for form in artworks. The purpose of this study was to examine and critique the key theoretical writings of three artists whose works have been recognized by the critics as significant and seminal for the Conceptual Art Movement: Joseph Kosuth, Sol LeWitt, and Terry Atkinson.Historical aspects relevant to this study included the following: (i) early twentieth-century antecedents of Conceptual Art; (ii) recent avant-garde movements of the 60s and 70s; (iii) the history and nature of the concept theories of Kosuth, LeWitt, and Atkinson; (ii) a critiqueof t ese theories in terms of their consistency and viabi ity for generating art; (iii) a comparison of Conceptual Art theories with both commonly accepted theories of art and more radical aesthetic theories of contemporary philosophers.Upon completion of this study, it was concluded that despite many ideological differences, Kosuth, LeWitt, and Atkinson agree on two key notions: (i) the locus of the "work of art" is not a physical object; and (ii) it is the artist's idea which alone accounts for the significance of an artwork. Their arguments in support of these notions are unsatisfactory. Longstanding issues in aesthetics, viz., the problems of defining art and evaluating its significance, are not resolved. The critics' acclaim of the writings critiqued in this study must therefore rest on extrinsic features such as the prestige of the artists, the relevance of the content of the writings to dominant trends in contemporary art, and the potential historical significance of their challenges to established views about art and aesthetics. en_US
dc.description.sponsorship Department of Art
dc.format.extent 3, iv, 191 leaves ; 28 cm. en_US
dc.source Virtual Press en_US
dc.subject.lcsh Conceptual art. en_US
dc.subject.lcsh Art -- Philosophy. en_US
dc.title Theories of three conceptual artists : a critique and comparison en_US
dc.description.degree Thesis (D. Ed.) en_US
dc.identifier.cardcat-url http://liblink.bsu.edu/catkey/425069 en_US
dc.identifier.cardcat-url http://liblink.bsu.edu/uhtbin/catkey/1834729


Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Doctoral Dissertations [3121]
    Doctoral dissertations submitted to the Graduate School by Ball State University doctoral candidates in partial fulfillment of degree requirements.

Show simple item record

Search Cardinal Scholar


Browse

My Account