When For Art

In 1950s, western art philosophy and art theory formed a two opposition factions in the discussion about “what is art”. There were respectively the Anti-Essentialism and Essentialism. The former one believed that the art can’t be defined while the latter one held the view that the art can be defined. Both sides insisted their own viewpoints and would not like to give in. In such a condition, American art philosopher Nelson Goodman took a reverse thinking mode on this issue. He thought that "what is art" this kind of question was not correct in itself because it had not noticed that something in sometime was art, but in different circumstances won’t become art. There is already no eternal works of art, so we should try to change the way we ask, the question should be "When is art". Goodman’s point of view has made a new transit point for discussions that seemed to have reached a deadlock. Under the enlightenment of Goodman to think about the various artifacts in human history of when and how the original "non art works" became into the later recognized "art works". We find that although the factors that contribute to this transition are diverse, the art theories, such as museums and similar Dickey’s "on practice", are the most important theories. This two theories to some certain extent, there are decisive factors.