Mapping of the essay by Pannaga S.G

Pannaga.S.G
1024108
CIA-2
MEL 132
Western aesthetics
15th July, 2010


Map of the essay, ‘The works of art themselves?’ - By Raymond Williams:
Paragraph 1:
1. Presence of art in sociology of culture
2. Long way - studying - sociology of culture- cultural institutions, formations and means of production. Bound to –stop and ask-we are studying (However important- own terms) - sufficiently central- presumed subject. We have – sociology- Where is art
Paragraph 2:
1. The whole inquiry begins with the work of art themselves.
2. Reasonable question (above) – true – there is unreasonable apparent form of it – intended – whole inquiry. Certain sociological facts and conditions – hastily admitted. So, minor place is reserved for them – But – we understand – to begin the real work – we go to the work of art themselves.
Paragraph 3:
1. Categorizing art based on forms and terms rather than socio-cultural
2. Every day decision- things like this- possible. Often and should- stop reasoning- art – instead- look- listen- read. This – different- conceptual shift (invited – break off- social inquiry) – not – specific attention – but to- generalized category – presumed internal rules. Difference- a necessary empirical shift (reasoning) & a deceptive empiricism (attention- autonomous objects – justified & protected terms unargued immediacy). One thing – leave sociological analysis – read a poem, - leave socio cultural analysis – adopt – socio cultural category – object of analysis.
Paragraph 4:
1. Distinguishing art from other human activities
2. The work of art themselves – category - not – neutral objective description. Socio cultural category – highest importance. Only because of it – cannot be – empirically presumed. Consider diverse practices – makes sense of – identical. Radically different – practices – directed – human senses (E. g. - hearing alone – sight alone) – single general category. Would be complex – at this level – music dance painting etc – properties in common – distinguish as a group – other human practices.
Paragraph 5:
1. Art that admit itself as art considering its form.
2. Another level- question – case of dance – as an example – those admit as a form of art – ballet – does not suggest itself- ballroom dancing. Normally set – pleasurable – social activity – such different form?
Paragraph 6:
1. Dealing with Art in terms of complexity, development, participation, exhibition and performance.
2. Early distinction – performed for audience – ballroom dancing – join in. what about – exhibition or competition – ballroom dancing? – next distinction – ballet – higher, more developed form – Then folk dance? – not – less developed – formally – yet folk dance –exhibition and performance.
Paragraph 7:
1. Art as conscious performance and/or exhibition or self satisfactory?
2. Earlier distinction – art – depends on – conscious performance? - cave painting? – seen as art. Sited – dark, inaccessible place. We do not know – period, culture – they were made. A case – painter or painters of Altamira (undiscovered) – cannot deny – its Art status – considering – not been consciously exhibited.
Paragraph 8:
1. ‘Art’ based on the quality of manual skills?
2. Status – matter of – supreme material execution – not serve – delimit art – distinguish – engineering work – rhetorically we speak of such work. As work of art – knife – car – pot – bridge. Art – applied – other purpose – to be work of art.

Paragraph 9:
1. Art possessing ‘aesthetic’ as distinction
2. Definition – autonomous distinction – common – modern – justification. Commands – vocabulary – aesthetic – designed for – proving it art. ‘Aesthetic’ new term – 18th c – generalization – art and creative art. Indicates – described previously. Interlock of terms – aesthetic intention, creative arts, aesthetic affect.
Paragraph 10:
1. Scientifically analyzing the terms indicating aesthetic.
2. Easy to categorize – ‘the aesthetic’ – bringing supporting and specifying terms. General term – beauty – specific term – harmony, proportion, form. A little doubt – on qualities. Scientific analysis – process and response – material and physical. Reality – what is being described?
Paragraph 11:
1. Problems at two levels; perception and response
2. Real problem – significance of perception; presumed specialization – response to – work of art.
Similar experience- human body, animals and bird shapes, etc. there is interaction – process and response – neutral perception. No definite way- defining category ‘art’.
Paragraph 12:
1. Beauty harmony and perception as the criteria in defining art.
2. Problem - marginal definition. Manmade – art running through – ornaments, dress, etc – used criteria – harmony and perception. – Here the definition is withheld. Art in – areas of human thought and discourse – values truth ideas observations. Perception – relevant. Most of us – truth and beauty.
Paragraph 13:
1. Art possessing the presumed values
2. 2nd major problem – conventional categorization – social interest. Further delimitation – value ob presumed value?
Paragraph 14:
1. Distinguishing works in various fields
2. Distinguish – in terms of quality – normal and inevitable. Such – clear and regular – delimit a category – specified as an art – ‘not art’, ‘not really art’. Example - Some novel – work of art – some – trash, pulp fiction, sub_ art, etc – others – routine, mediocre, library fodder. Apply these descriptions – willing to give reason. Terms harsher- tendency exists.
Paragraph 15:
1. Distinction of art in terms of seriousness/relation to reality
2. We can see – specific judgments – presumptions of classes in relation to the nature of practice (mixed criteria – criteria which are incompatible with the original delimitations.) Bad novel =category ‘novel’ ( at the level of generic definition). But, fails – certain things – seriousness and relation to reality.
Paragraph 16:
1. Moving to ‘the work of art themselves’ leaving ‘social categories’ aside.
2. Confusion – ‘art’, ‘sub art’ ‘non art’. Tend to shift – social categories (Commercial popular culture) - ‘the work of art themselves’. Refuse – rhetorically invoking – by – strictest intellectual articulation and thoughts.
Reference:
1. Williams, Raymond. “The work of art themselves” Art in modern culture: an anthology of critical text. EDS. Francis Franscina, and Jonathan Harris. London/Newyork: Phaidon, 1992. Print.