8/12/2019 Art Philosophy of Danto

1/2

Journal 7:

Does it matter to you that the replicas of ancient sculptures in the Blanton are replicas?

Would you have a different experience if you were able to encounter the real thing

(assuming it were intact) than you do encountering the replica? Explain your position.

[Danto]

A replica is defined as an exact reproduction of an artifact. They closely resemble the

original concerning its shape and appearance. It makes a minimal impact to me that the ancient

sculptures in the Blanton are replicas. Although the sculptures are arguably similar in size, shape

and color, they are simply not the original works of art. The replicas achieve their goal in

visualizing the initial piece of art. However, they do not wear over time the same was at the

original nor are they built out of the exact same materials. If I was able to encounter the real

thing, I think I would have a similar experience, but be able to understand the artist more closely.

I am assuming that the real original sculpture would be slightly different than the replica and thus

I would be exposed to a more accurate depiction of the art. However, if someone was to lie to me

and say that it was real, when in fact it was not, I think the placebo effect may occur. I may be

more intrigued by an artifact if I thought it was the original rather than a replica. This emphasizes

how important interpretation and perspective is when considering artwork.

The concept of replicas brings to mind the concept of fake designer goods, such as

watches and handbags. People are drawn to the concept of replicas because they very much so

resemble the real thing. As long as the replication is high enough quality to depict the original, it

should have a similar effect on viewers. However, as soon as the quality begins to stray from the

original, it fails in fooling spectators. For example, if a Louis Vuitton bag absolutely screams

fake, then it is going to look cheap and tacky because many people are aware of what the

8/12/2019 Art Philosophy of Danto

2/2

original looks like. However, when considering the ancient sculptures in the Blanton, very few

people know precisely what the real thing looks like. Therefore, those that are very familiar with

that particular piece of history will care more that they are replicas than those that have no

general background knowledge about the artifact.

Danto takes a conventional approach in defining artwork. Conventional definitions

rejected arts connection to aesthetic, formal or expressive properties defining art. In other words,

he viewed art in an institutional or historical sense and claimed that art is essentially a

sociological category. His definition of art considers whatever art schools, museums, and artists

get away with, regardless of their formal definitions. Danto feels that for something to be a work

of art, it must have a subject. Furthermore, the subject must have its own style and project some

attitude or point of view. Next, art must compel the audience to draw their own conclusions

about the art through the use of metaphorical rhetorical ellipsis. Lastly, the work in question and

interpretations require an art historical context. By Dantos definition of art, replicas have similar

impressions on spectators as the originals do. This is because they fit the aforementioned

qualifications and do in fact have historical context and its own style.