At least since Diderot, the main tradition of criticism in all the arts, appealing to such a apparently dissimilar criteria as verisimilitude and moral correctness, in effect treats the work of art as a statement being made in the form of a work of art.
To treat works of art in this fashion is not wholly irrelevant. But it is, obviously, putting art to use—for such purposes as inquiring into the history of ideas, diagnosing contemporary culture, or creating social solidarity. Such a treatment has little to do with what actually happens when a person possessing some training and aesthetic sensibility looks at a work of art appropriately. A work of art encountered as a work of art is an experience, not a statement or an answer to a question. Art is not only about something; it is something. A work of art is a thing in the world, not just a text or commentary on the world. …
[Artworks’] distinctive feature is that they give rise not to conceptual knowledge … but to something like an excitation, a phenomenon of commitment, judgment in a state of thralldom or captivation.
Susan Sontag ⬩ On Style ⬩ Against Interpretation, and Other Essays
added April 17, 2023 ⬩ random excerpt