Conceptual Art

Question 1: "Works of art are analytic propositions. that is, if viewed within their context-as-art, they provide no information what-so-ever about any matter of fact. A work of art is a tautology in that it is a presentation of the artist's intention, that is, he is saying that that particular work of art is art, which means, is a definition of art. Thus, that it is art is true." "If someone calls it art, it's art" (595). I thought this was interesting, and would like to discuss this more, is it really, if someone calls it art, it's art? People need to see something as art to look for the meaning behind it or else the meaning is lost. What if people don't care or choose not to see it as art? Is it still art?

Question 2: I don't understand the part about how the visual part of conceptual art is illegitimate. Isn't that part of the art? The conceptual part of the art is important but the visual part is how we get to the conceptual part, so how is it illegitimate. This confused me.