Arts On The Controversy And Its Methods

The central questions for the ontology of art are:What sort of entities are works of art? How are works of art of various kinds related to the mental states of artists or viewers,to physical objects, or to abstract visual,auditory or linguistic structures? Under what conditions do works come into existence,survive,or cease to exist?Attempts to answer these questions have inspired a rich debate in aesthetics,yielding an astonishing variety of answers.Yet the final battle generally takes place on deeper grounds of philosophy.As a result,it seems that there are no simple and direct solutions available for any of these questions.In this paper,we will try to introduce a different strategy.It is neutral and impartial to the conflicts in ontology of art.And still it provides an operational method for the discussion.Our primary purpose is to free the concept of the work from the various kinds of blurring that in the studies to date stem,on the one hand,from the still strong psychologistic tendencies and,on the other,from considerations of a general theory of art and art works.The essential structure of the calligraphic work,in our opinion,lies in the fact that it is a formation constructed of several heterogeneous strata.The diversity of the material and the roles of the individual strata make the whole work,not a monotonic formation,but one that by its nature has a polyphonic character.As a result,many apparent conflicts in the theories of calligraphy may be resolved without embracing subjectivism,by noting that the individuals concerned may be passing judgment on different strata of the calligraphic work.It also enables us to understand stylistic differences among calligrapher and over time as differences in which strata are emphasized and which de-emphasized. Yet we can do so without seeing such changes as forming a radical break or undermining the idea that these are all part of a continuous calligraphic tradition.