Dalrymple Strikes Again– On the Triumph of Shallowness

January 10, 2009

What is Progress and Does Art Enjoy it? good read >>>Beauty and the Best

Dalrymple’s analysis of the analogy of “progress” in art with “progress” in science finds the analogy to be false.  This seems right, according to a conventional understanding of progress; e.g. progress has happened when a state that has evolved from previous states (not out of a vacuum) is generally or widely accepted as a better state. So it’s easy to see that scientific knowledge stands of the backs of many previous paradigms (world views). No scientist starts at the beginning or develops theories in a vacuum. Art on the other hand– especially the contemporary work of art– does not seek to further anything but the singular vision of its author.

But in my view a disanalogy with scientifc progress does not legitimate the claim that art makes no progress at all.  Question to explore: What is artistic progress?


We seem to have moved beyond the question “what is art,” and thus beg the question of whether something qualifies as art. But have we arrived safely in a reality that honors the rule: “if it is made by an artist, it must be art?”

It was Heidegger’s seminal work “The origin of the Work of Art” that linked the work of art with the artist. Not only did each presuppose the other,  but the truth and being of each relies, or is understood as createdness, which can only spring out of the art itself. “Art is the origin of the artwork and of the artist.”

more will be revealed…right now, I gotta go make some art.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: