Art in Theory Overview: John Locke and Berkeley

Name
Course
Professor
Date
Art in Theory Overview
Art in Theory 1648-1815 is a detailed text that covers essential subjects in the study of art, including early discussions on ancient art and modern art considerations (p 105). Some of the intriguing matters enshrined in the book include aspects connected to the contrast in form and imagination. Such aspects were advanced by many philosophers, motivated by the processes of thoughts and ideas of other people. When one considers how humans think, the creation of reality is frequently impacted by the thoughts that flow through their heads; this is how artists work. On the other hand, imagination can be impacted by other items and hence may not be a fully internal process, as art can be generated through such imagination. The concept of creativity as a source of creation in all facets of life was fascinating.
John Locke proposed that life events that have had a significant impact on individuals contribute to the establishment of likes and dislikes for similar things (p 203). The same reveals how people produce artwork based on their experiences when interpreted in art. Artists like Louise Bourgeoise are good examples of this type of art since they reveal how their own experiences influence their work. The same progress can be seen in everyday life when people are drawn to or more compassionate to those who have had comparable experiences. Similarly, art is a mirror of how such experiences are expressed, from thoughts to products.
The significance of distinguishing between beauty and goodness demonstrates the difference between vice and virtue. While Shaftesbury's modern theory does not distinguish between the two, there is a way in which people experience objects that is not uniform and cannot be attributed to the basic cause. On the one hand, an individual may seek beauty in an object, but this does not always imply a desire to acquire it. Addison's portrayal of imagination was divided into two parts: one concerned with the sight of objects and the other with the sight of objects or things that linger in our minds (p 56). The category limits the notion of imagination from the formulation of ideas to the replication of the same in art, despite the fact that this is visible in how artists display artwork and how individuals exhibit their representations in any kind of artistry. In addition to sight and memories, experiences and emotions have a role in the development of art, as Hutcheson explains.
Berkeley's advancement, in which he argues that people's thoughts only exist in the sense that they can perceive them in their minds, ignores an important part of art's inherent existence. Ideas are perceived in mind; nonetheless, failure to acknowledge what is visible does not imply that it does not exist. In the development of the same, the artistry that expresses enthusiasm is also significant. Passion, zeal, and deep thought are required to achieve sublime art.
Art in Theory (1648-1815) Critical Review
From the creation of the French Academy to the end of the Napoleonic Wars, Art in Theory (1648-1815) contains a diverse and extensive set of documents on art theory. Its principal goal is to give students and teachers documentary material for informed and up-to-date study. Its 240 texts, strong organizational principles, and substantial editorial content provide a vibrant and important introduction to early modern art. Harrison, Wood, and Gaiger have compiled essays by artists, reviewers, scholars, intellectual luminaries, and art directors, some of which have been reproduced in their fullness and others which have been abridged from longer works. There are also a lot of materials from Italian, German, French, Spanish, Latin, and Dutch sources, including a lot of fresh translations. Early debates about the relative merits of ancient and modern art, debates between advocates of color and shape, the origins of contemporary art critique in Salon reviews, art and diplomacy during the French Revolution era, the artistic theories of Romanticism and Neo-classicism, and the advent of landscape painting, are just a few of the major themes covered. Each section begins with an essay that places the period's ideas in historical perspective while also tying theoretical reasoning and arguments to changes in art practice.
The editors explain that they "worked with the idea of a modern art constantly in mind" (p. 3) when creating the Art in Theory initiative and that their focus "has been principally focused upon the techniques of sculpture and painting as fine arts" (p. 5). As a result, they have highly limited notions of what constitutes modern art, the essence of modern art, and a narrative that may connect the 17th and 18th centuries to the 20th century. They might have recognized the dangers of categorization involved in discussions of 'fine art.' This consideration would have been possible if they had brought to mind the thesis advanced by Kristeller's famous essay, 'The Modern System of the Arts.' The editors acknowledged the essay in their bibliography. Today, the Oxford Encyclopedia of Aesthetics, which was probably released too late for them to utilize, provides crucial insights into the issues surrounding both "art theory" and "aesthetics."
Being 'modern' has been read as 'it is necessary to be of one's time,' yet 'being of one's time' can also imply utilizing the products of another's time and culture. Like other modernists and previous 'modern' artists such as Hogarth, Picasso drew inspiration from the past works of art. This holds for texts as well. Should this collection include books produced in other dialects at different points in history? In this environment, current vernacular translations of ancient works by authors like Longinus and Cicero, among many others, shaped modern philosophy. The notes for Leonardo's Trattato Della Pittura were written in the early 16th century, but they were not printed in French and Italian until 1651. They only became popular among artists and authors after that. 1They were first published in 1721, then reissued at the close of the 18th century, and finally translated again in the early 19th century. These writings were not seen as antiquated sources but rather as significant resources for modern art practice. They were put to good use. The logic of "Art in Theory 1648-1815' is founded on the precious approach to objects of a connoisseur, not on the creation, re-creation, and receipt of texts.
According to the editors, ‘many of the most notable works of the past years have consciously attempted to obscure the borders of art’s cultural and historical studies. They have also tried to widen the scope of such works to embrace themes hitherto thought the proper concern of the art." Numerous books and shows have emerged from a heightened focus on the so-called "minor" arts as vital venues of women's innovation, such as science or the body, sexuality or surveillance. … [However], we must set certain boundaries" (p. 5). "Out go extracts from the Marquis de Sade and Captain Cook; neither the erotic, the exotic nor the pornographic surface their ugly heads in the index (p. 6)." The divide between minor and fine arts is anachronistic for the 18th century, and it also misrepresents the activity of twentieth-century artists. Landscape gardening sneaks into the book via a lengthy conversation about beauty, so why is there no acknowledgment of clients' and artists' strong passion for the oriental and chinoiserie? If the Editors pretend to be uninterested in decorating, they will have to rule out a lot of early 20th-century work as well. How will they sell all of the sensual art made during that time period unless they say that it's not art because it is romantic? Without linking Hogarth's printmaking operations to Henry Fielding's 'new province of writing,' how are they going to portray the revolution inherent in his printmaking works? One of the most notable art f...