Rethinking Low, Middle, and High Art

7Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

What distinguishes middle, low, 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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Lau, T. C. (2022). Rethinking Low, Middle, and High Art. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 80(4), 432–443. https://doi.org/10.1093/jaac/kpac034

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free