ABSTRACT
Arthur Danto’s definition of art claims that something is a work of art because it is the subject of an interpretation that is inscribed in a network of historical, theoretical and social meanings, which is responsible for assigning the status of artwork. It is an essentialist definition which however, is not based on something that is perceived in the object, but on the object being perceived as art. In this paper, I develop a specific investigation about the concept of “interpretation”, taking into account that it is one of the cardinal points in Danto’s definition of art. I argue that the author develops this subject in an ambiguous way, in other words, that there is confusion between two different meanings of interpretation in his texts, and that its fundamental role in the definition of art is inseparable from the historical and social contextualization guaranteed by the artworld.
Keywords:
Interpretation; contemporary art; Arthur Danto; artworld; art criticism