Over the past few decades, the philosophy of art has enjoyed a remarkable

revival. More and more studies are being devoted to the philosophical or
theoretical probing into questions about the meaning of art. This gradual but
steady expansion in the field also suggests a broadening group of potential
readers. Indeed, the present situation may perhaps be characterized as not simply
a revival but as an unprecedented breakthrough. There are three major
developments that help explain this. Firstly, today's increased importance of
philosophy of art is due to modern art itself. Revolutionary avant-garde
movements, attempting to transcend existing norms in art as early as around
1910, unleashed a process that has challenged any supposedly self-evident
notions of art ever since. This process still continues today. Modern art is
constantly pushing the boundaries of the “artistic”, seeking and providing new
answers to the question of what art really is. Not surprisingly, every new
movement is accompanied by a theoretical discourse to justify its premises. In the
art world, the permanent drive for renewal has urged more and more artists to
turn to philosophy to support their concepts of art. Artists have sometimes taken
this approach to such extremes as to identify thinking about art with art itself, as
has happened in conceptual art. In any case, this explains the growing
significance of art philosophy to the development of art.

– Art is an imitation for Plato, the work of the artisan is to copy or imitate the idea,
eternal, immutable, for one thing. The artist proceeds by imitation but also what copy
is the sensible thing is to say an already imperfect reproduction of the Idea. Instead of
approaching the truth, it increases the distance that separates her.

– The Judgement of Taste: Kant, is the art of reflective judgment opposing the ruling
factor. The latter is used in scientific discourse and is to apply concepts (universal)
prior to singular objects. Reflective Judgement (eg, “How beautiful”) may instead
assume universality. The beautiful is disinterested (the utility and fun do not take part)
it pleases universally without a concept (universal subjective) well, it’s a finality
without end (it shows in order, a plan, but does nothing beyond itself)
– The Science of Art: Hegel criticizes Kant for having retained a subjective point of
view on art. But a science of art is possible in that art is a production of the spirit
(Geist), it is not unlike the individual consciousness. The science of art is historical,
because the idea of art unfolds itself in history until the modern era that marks the end
of art.

– The powers of the imagination: Delacroix and Baudelaire asserts the primacy of
the imagination (constructive) in art. The primary subject of art is not nature but the
artist himself, the depths of his soul, emotions, etc.. Alain critique this view by stating
that the imagination is an illusion and that nothing is given, in the human psyche, an
emotional disorder. Art is the externalization, the act of ordering and discipline of the
passions.

– The artist as a work of art: For Nietzsche, the aesthetic categories are metaphysical
categories. The figure of Dionysus, which is essential to tragedy, is what is terrifying
to disproportionate in nature. Nature, only an artistic vision can support and
embellish, is the power of metamorphosis, becoming, creation and destruction. The
artist, one man (or superman) is the one that truly manages to order the chaos of
impulses that inhabit it. Aesthetics is an “Applied Physiology”.

– Art and technology: The question of the future of art in an age where technology
acquires a dominant position is essential. Benjamin shows as well as the
reproducibility of art (photography, for example), they tend to lose their aura, their
sacred nature.

– The work of art and the tool: For Heidegger the traditional conception of the natural
thing, the tool and the work of art as composed of matter and form comes from human
activity in manufacturing which a material is worked to fit a function, and thus
becomes a tool. But daily use tools mask their being, their truth because the tool is
effective only in strict as it is forgotten. The work of art is what reveals the being of
the tool, membership in a human world and a primitive nature (the Earth).