A Study Of The Public View In Dickey’s Institutional Theory Of Art

George Dickey’s Institutional Theory of Art had a significant impact in the West and is a representative view in analytical aesthetics.Its basic constituents are artists,the public,artworks,the art world system and so on.However,so far,studies on art institutionalism at home and abroad have either analyzed the basic meaning of art institution and it’s role in art practice,or explained some of its constituent elements such as the "conferment" of the artist,or its anti-aesthetic dimension,but little research has been done on Dickey’s view of the public.There is little research on Dickey’s view of the public.However,in the framework for presentation of a work of art of Dickey’s Institutional Theory of Art,the public,the artist,and the work of art are the three central components,in which the public and the artist,based on the principles of general conceptions of art that they both grasp and specific conceptions of the medium used by the artist,constitute the public and the artist constitute the presentation group,the smallest group of artworks within the art world.It is clear from this that a study of Dickey’s Institutional Theory of Art cannot ignore Dickey’s understanding of the connotations and fundamental role of the public.In addition,there are questions that need to be answered within Dickey’s view of the public.In Art and Aesthetics,the main terms used in his view of the public are "goers" and "appreciate," but in the later The Art Circle,they become "public" and "understand." This inconsistency in expression is not explained in his Theory.However,according to Dickey’s division of his own thought,he regards the Institutional Theory of Art in Art and Aesthetics as the earlier version and the Institutional Theory of Art in The Art Circle as the later version,and the result of this division fits the inconsistent expression of his public view in these two works.Therefore,this paper argues that the study of Dickey’s public view needs to be placed in the framework of the pre-late Institutional Theory of Art for interpretation.In the 1970 s,in the face of criticism from European and American academics,Dickey repeatedly emphasized that his art system was not a formal institution,nor was the art world a formal group.Thus,in Art and Aesthetics,published in this period,the public is "those who go to see art regularly," a formulation that reflects the existence of this group in the art world in the form of unknown regulars and explains that they are able to appreciate art because they have acquired knowledge of it through study.However,because Dickey does not deal with the relationship between the public’s appreciation and the fact that art should be value-neutral,and because the scope of"frequent art-goers" is too broad and differs from the group Dickey wants to refer to,he uses the term "public" in The Art Circle,which is itself informal and anti-aesthetic.In The Art Circle,he uses the term "understanding" of the "public," which is inherently informal and anti-aesthetic,instead of "appreciation" of the "people who go to see art.On the whole,however,Dickey’s view of the public remains unchanged,both in terms of the people to whom it is directed and in terms of its actual role.In the Institutional Theory of Art,Dickey’s view of the public has always been directed at the unknown,ordinary art appreciators within the art appreciation community,and the role of the public has always been to join the artist in social relations to form a closed-loop space that defines art.However,because this closed-loop space constituted by the public and the artist in the Institutional Theory of Art refers to a closed state of social relations,it has no clear requirements for the content of the artwork,which not only leads to the fact that this closed-loop space can include almost all objects in defining art,but also makes the partnership between the public and the artist in the production of the artwork into a non-external collusion.