Rethinking Low, Middle, and High Art

Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism (4):1-12 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

What distinguishes low, middle, and high art? In this article, I give an ameliorative analysis of these concepts. On what I call the Capacity View, the distinction between low, middle, and high art depends on the relation between an artwork’s perceiver (specifically her aesthetic responsive capacities) and the perceived artwork. Though the Capacity View may not align perfectly with folk usage, the view is worth our attention due to three attractive upshots. First, it explains how an artwork’s status level can be elevated or lowered over time and why biases can lead to mistaken judgments about such statuses. Second, it sheds light on the idea of cultural inheritance and why certain forms of aesthetic deference may be justified. Finally, it explains how high, middle, and low art each make distinctive contributions to the good life.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-06-30

Downloads
987 (#56,137)

6 months
171 (#68,677)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Ting Cho Lau
Wagner College

Citations of this work

Simple Beauty.John Dyck - forthcoming - Australasian Journal of Philosophy.
Aesthetic Snobbery.Stephanie Patridge - 2023 - Philosophy Compass 18 (9):e12940.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Importance of Being Rational.Errol Lord - 2018 - Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
The Sovereignty of Good.Iris Murdoch - 2009 - New York,: Routledge.
The Importance of Being Rational.Errol Lord - 2013 - Dissertation, Princeton University
What good are our intuitions: Philosophical analysis and social kinds.Sally Haslanger - 2006 - Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 80 (1):89-118.

View all 21 references / Add more references