Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang
issue deserving our attention is theAnotherto which we can separate an artworkextentthe artist. This question has gainedfromin recent years with high-profileimportanceabout the crimes committed byrevelationssingers, actors and film-makers. Similarartists,are asked in other disciplines—questionsmany influential philosophers andindeed,were almost certainly racists,scientistsor misogynists—but are artistschauviniststheir art more inextricably linked? Do theandor unethical actions of an artist morecrimesobservers have argued that it is theSomein people that makes for good art, andbadnessexperiencing and learning from their artthatnot mean condoning or perpetuating theirdoesor rewarding them financially. (See, forideas,Russell Smith’s article “Good Art byexample,People” in the Canadian newspaper TheBadand Mail, 20 November 2016.)Globe2007 Guillermo Vargas exhibited ExpositionIn1, a dog tied to a wall in the Codice GalleryNoNicaragua, with the words “You are whatinread” behind it, while the Sandinistayouwas played backwards. Vargas lateranthemthe dog, named Natividad, eventuallyclaimedof starvation and dehydration duediedthe exhibition. This caused widespreadtobut Vargas responded by questioningoutrageno one in the audience had taken anywhyto feed or free Natividad. Vargas wasactionwith a familiar tension: was the artistplayingor the audience? More to the TOKresponsible,how would we go about asking thatpoint,those who are interested, it is not clearForNatividad actually perished—whetherthe gallery’s director, Juanitareportedlystated that the dog was treated wellBermúdez,Vargas and released the next day. Vargas hasbyconfirmed or denied this, insisting thatneverreal outcome—the audience’s inaction andtheclear.complicity—washas a significant and perhaps unique powerArtevoke, provoke, offend or inspire humanitytosome end. This quality of framing,towardsdistorting, interpreting, revealing orcropping,reality towards some truth has made arthidingand powerful and, therefore, a targetinfluentialthose who wish to control influence andforThe practice of censorship is commonlypower.to governments, but humankind atattributedlevels has a long history of censorship, basedallcalls to moral propriety and righteousness,onand respect for others, social stabilitysensitivitythe protection of vulnerable groups.andrange from the peculiar—QueenExamplesencounter with the naked, 6-metreVictoria’smarble statue of David prompted thehighof a proportionately accurate “fig leaf”makingcover his nudity—to the systematic erasuretorevolutionary icons such as Tank Man. A lessofform of censorship is in deciding whatobviousand is not, art, because artistic status confersis,and legal protections to a work.socialof censorship in the arts aboundExamplesthe reasons for censorship are similarlyandIn groups, discuss the followingvaried.questions.1. Think about who censors art.2. What are tacit, or informal, forms ofII outlined how art can serve at theSectionof humanity’s social, politicalvanguardmoral evolution. With the advantage ofandwe can identify works of art thathindsight,IV. EthicsIV. EthicsIV.2 Censorshipdeeply affect how we experience their artwork?IV.1 The role of the audienceFor discussionCensoring art(a)How are they given this power?(b)What criteria do they use?censorship?question?IV.2.1 Censorship as a response totransgressionwere transgressive—violating the social,315
IV. Ethicsor moral boundaries of the time—topoliticala progressive agenda. For example,promoteworks from an exhibition, Art AIDSartisticmay have helped to foster progressiveAmerica,towards AIDS, and yet wereattitudesand/or censored in their time. Thiscondemnedan obvious and recurring theme in art thatisbecome something of a cliché. Should wehasconclude that censorship is wrong? Ofthereforethe situation is much more complicated.course,history of art is filled with works thatTheand provoked outrage and yet failedoffendeddeliver any positive social change. If it istoto recall particular examples, it may bedifficultwe scarcely noticed them (or becausebecausewere quickly censored), but there are manytheyof sexist, racist or religiously hatefulinstancesmasquerading as art.workbig part of the problem of what to censor andAto permit, is the difficulty in rigorouslywhatart. This provides people with adefiningshortcut to censorship: “Oh, that’sconvenientart, that’s [something else]”. Should artistsnotable to challenge our conceptions of humanbeor religious righteousness? Of coursesexualityshould. Are there limits to how they cantheythis? Apparently, yes, in every society anddothat we know of. How are those limitsnationat, who decides them and what are thearrivedof such censorship? These are TOKimplicationswould be fooled by survival bias toWethat art should not be censoredconcludeit changes the world for the better;becausewould also be foolish to fail to realize thatweartists never get that chance, because ofsomeAnd without censorship, wouldcensorship.not lose some of its transgressive powersartprovoke, question and incite? Part of thetopower of art comes from theprogressiveto it—the impulse to outrage andresponseUltimately, how we strike thatcensorship.is a result of the forces and voices thatbalancepeculiar subset within the topic of censorshipAthe censoring of art from the past. If historyisanything to go by, our tolerance to artisincreased with time; works that werehasin the past, perhaps because of theircensoredor provocative tone, are moreblasphemousaccepted today. However, there is awidelymovement to censor works fromcontemporarypast. What does this suggest about populartheof morality and progress in art? Isconceptionsin art more contextual than truth in othertruthAOKs?in 2001, the music critic AnthonyWritingdescribed the distinction betweenTommasiniand reality—art takes many forms and isartalways easy to define, but it is always onenotremoved from reality. Well-known imagesstepVietnamese children running from a napalmofor of the falling twin towers might beattackand captivating to view,artistically-composedTommasini stresses, we must recognisebut,as truth rather than art. Would you agreethemTommasini’s distinction between truthwithart? andthe Tate Modern Museum ofConversely,lists photojournalism as a form of artLondonemphasizing its need to remain “honestwhileimpartial”. To what extent is that possible?anddiscussed in section II, there can be valueAsconsidering photojournalism as an art eveninits status as a documentary medium isthoughaccepted. Documentary photographers,widelyinvoking particular aesthetics andbycan have a significant impact innarratives,realm, much like artists striving to createthiscertain mood in their work. Therefore,acomply with strict ethicalphotojournaliststhat have evolved and continueguidelinesimprove over time. Let’s explore howtoaesthetic decisions in photography canthethe meaning of a work, beginning withaffectparticularly shocking images taken bytheWallace Hooper of the MadrasWilloughbyof 1876–1888.famine10IV.2.2 Censorship of the pastIV.3 The ethics of aestheticsquestions.put forward their case on either side.316
- Page 271 and 272: III. Methods and toolshistorian, jo
- Page 273 and 274: III. Methods and toolsinstad of oth
- Page 275 and 276: III. Methods and toolsmonks and lrg
- Page 277 and 278: III. Methods and toolsh had n ordrd
- Page 279 and 280: III. Methods and toolswould naiv,
- Page 281 and 282: IV. Ethicsin Chaptr 5. Grgory Young
- Page 283 and 284: IV. Ethicsis filld with xtraordinar
- Page 285 and 286: 10chapter explores the human encoun
- Page 287 and 288: I. Scopethe historical development
- Page 289 and 290: I. Scopehas the status of women art
- Page 291 and 292: I. ScopeTruth and knowledge in art:
- Page 293 and 294: I. Scopeterms: ElizabethSearchDesir
- Page 295 and 296: II. Perspectivesby Vermeer were rar
- Page 297 and 298: II. Perspectiveswas one thing van M
- Page 299 and 300: II. Perspectivesare found in the br
- Page 301 and 302: II. Perspectivesterms: CNN Business
- Page 303 and 304: II. Perspectivesof the time, to dra
- Page 305 and 306: II. Perspectivesthe last few hundre
- Page 307 and 308: II. Perspectivesafter that date, bu
- Page 309 and 310: II. Perspectiveshave been examples
- Page 311 and 312: II. PerspectivesIII. Methods and to
- Page 313 and 314: III. Methods and tools1. Is having
- Page 315 and 316: III. Methods and toolsThe rst thing
- Page 317 and 318: III. Methods and toolscan be deeply
- Page 319 and 320: IV. Ethicsmay notice that many know
- Page 321: IV. Ethicsartist’s intent to conf
- Page 325 and 326: IV. Ethicsfact that people far away
- Page 327 and 328: IV. Ethicsterms: NorthrupSearchtrue
- Page 329 and 330: I. Scopemathmatis arris an aura ofN
- Page 331 and 332: I. Scopeof th arly xampls of this
- Page 333 and 334: II. Perspectivesof mathmatial knowl
- Page 335 and 336: II. Perspectivesonpts an appar so s
- Page 337 and 338: II. Perspectivesdid th st minds of
- Page 339 and 340: II. Perspectiveswrits that long for
- Page 341 and 342: II. Perspectivesognitiv nurosintist
- Page 343 and 344: II. Perspectivesprptuat inquality o
- Page 345 and 346: III. Methods and toolsonsidr two on
- Page 347 and 348: III. Methods and toolsproofs wr rit
- Page 349 and 350: III. Methods and tools10 features a
- Page 351 and 352: III. Methods and toolsmathmatis is
- Page 353 and 354: III. Methods and toolswritrs of The
- Page 355 and 356: IV. Ethicsthat “I hav nvr don any
- Page 357 and 358: IV. Ethicsold adag, widly itd and o
- Page 359 and 360: IV. Ethicswll-puliisd figur of 1 in
- Page 361 and 362: IV. EthicsMathematics. Th artil prs
- Page 363 and 364: I. THE EXHIBITIONquestions are ques
- Page 365 and 366: I. THE EXHIBITION11. Can new knowle
- Page 367 and 368: I. THE EXHIBITIONa new subject can
- Page 369 and 370: I. THE EXHIBITIONthat objects do no
- Page 371 and 372: I. THE EXHIBITIONyou describe them,
IV. Ethics
or moral boundaries of the time—to
political
a progressive agenda. For example,
promote
works from an exhibition, Art AIDS
artistic
may have helped to foster progressive
America,
towards AIDS, and yet were
attitudes
and/or censored in their time. This
condemned
an obvious and recurring theme in art that
is
become something of a cliché. Should we
has
conclude that censorship is wrong? Of
therefore
the situation is much more complicated.
course,
history of art is filled with works that
The
and provoked outrage and yet failed
offended
deliver any positive social change. If it is
to
to recall particular examples, it may be
difficult
we scarcely noticed them (or because
because
were quickly censored), but there are many
they
of sexist, racist or religiously hateful
instances
masquerading as art.
work
big part of the problem of what to censor and
A
to permit, is the difficulty in rigorously
what
art. This provides people with a
defining
shortcut to censorship: “Oh, that’s
convenient
art, that’s [something else]”. Should artists
not
able to challenge our conceptions of human
be
or religious righteousness? Of course
sexuality
should. Are there limits to how they can
they
this? Apparently, yes, in every society and
do
that we know of. How are those limits
nation
at, who decides them and what are the
arrived
of such censorship? These are TOK
implications
would be fooled by survival bias to
We
that art should not be censored
conclude
it changes the world for the better;
because
would also be foolish to fail to realize that
we
artists never get that chance, because of
some
And without censorship, would
censorship.
not lose some of its transgressive powers
art
provoke, question and incite? Part of the
to
power of art comes from the
progressive
to it—the impulse to outrage and
response
Ultimately, how we strike that
censorship.
is a result of the forces and voices that
balance
peculiar subset within the topic of censorship
A
the censoring of art from the past. If history
is
anything to go by, our tolerance to art
is
increased with time; works that were
has
in the past, perhaps because of their
censored
or provocative tone, are more
blasphemous
accepted today. However, there is a
widely
movement to censor works from
contemporary
past. What does this suggest about popular
the
of morality and progress in art? Is
conceptions
in art more contextual than truth in other
truth
AOKs?
in 2001, the music critic Anthony
Writing
described the distinction between
Tommasini
and reality—art takes many forms and is
art
always easy to define, but it is always one
not
removed from reality. Well-known images
step
Vietnamese children running from a napalm
of
or of the falling twin towers might be
attack
and captivating to view,
artistically-composed
Tommasini stresses, we must recognise
but,
as truth rather than art. Would you agree
them
Tommasini’s distinction between truth
with
art? and
the Tate Modern Museum of
Conversely,
lists photojournalism as a form of art
London
emphasizing its need to remain “honest
while
impartial”. To what extent is that possible?
and
discussed in section II, there can be value
As
considering photojournalism as an art even
in
its status as a documentary medium is
though
accepted. Documentary photographers,
widely
invoking particular aesthetics and
by
can have a significant impact in
narratives,
realm, much like artists striving to create
this
certain mood in their work. Therefore,
a
comply with strict ethical
photojournalists
that have evolved and continue
guidelines
improve over time. Let’s explore how
to
aesthetic decisions in photography can
the
the meaning of a work, beginning with
affect
particularly shocking images taken by
the
Wallace Hooper of the Madras
Willoughby
of 1876–1888.
famine
10
IV.2.2 Censorship of the past
IV.3 The ethics of aesthetics
questions.
put forward their case on either side.
316