Premium
Justifying the Arts: The Value of Illuminating Failures
Author(s) -
FORREST MICHELLE
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
journal of philosophy of education
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.501
H-Index - 41
eISSN - 1467-9752
pISSN - 0309-8249
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-9752.2010.00771.x
Subject(s) - anecdote , the arts , epistemology , value (mathematics) , aesthetics , sociology , work of art , reading (process) , art criticism , philosophy of education , visual arts education , visual arts , philosophy , higher education , art , law , computer science , literature , linguistics , machine learning , performance art , political science , art history
This paper revisits how late 20th‐century attempts to account for conceptual and other difficult art‐work by defining the concept ‘art’ have failed to offer a useful strategy for educators seeking a non‐instrumental justification for teaching the arts. It is suggested that this theoretical ground is nonetheless instructive and provides useful background in searching for a viable approach to justification. It is claimed that, though definition may fail and grand theories not coalesce, one would be wise to emulate Passmore (1954, 1990) who argues for an aesthetic approach to works of art and who proceeds like the fox, from a specific work that becomes more complex through analysis. His approach is employed in describing a performance series by the Cellist of Sarajevo, which raises further questions regarding what it means to start from a specific art‐work and how doing so exemplifies Fleming's (2006) suggestion that in justifying the arts we connect them to our ethical lives. Passmore's strategy is then extended to the aesthetic experience of reading this essay and the paper concludes with the author's personal anecdote in response to Higgins' (2008) call for genuinely aesthetic defences of aesthetic education.