Duchamp's 'Fountain' (a mass-produced urinal submitted to an art exhibition) and an identical urinal in a hardware store are physically indistinguishable. According to the institutional theory, what accounts for their different art statuses?
AFountain has greater aesthetic beauty because of its context of display
BFountain demonstrates superior craftsmanship because Duchamp selected and signed it
CFountain was presented by an artist acting within the artworld as a candidate for appreciation; the hardware store urinal was not
DFountain has expressive content (rebellion against tradition) that the hardware store urinal lacks
The institutional theory holds that art status is conferred, not discovered in an object's properties. What makes Fountain art is not anything intrinsic to the porcelain — neither its beauty (it has none by conventional standards), its craftsmanship (it required none), nor its expressiveness (options A, B, D all appeal to intrinsic properties). What makes it art is that Duchamp, acting as a recognized artist within the artworld network, put it forward as a candidate for appreciation — and the artworld received and canonized it. The hardware store urinal lacks only this institutional act.
Question 2 Multiple Choice
According to Dickie's institutional theory, which of the following is the most accurate definition of an artwork?
AAn object created with the intent to be beautiful or emotionally expressive
BAn artifact upon which someone acting on behalf of the artworld has conferred the status of candidate for appreciation
CAn object that has been evaluated positively by trained critics and displayed in a recognized gallery or museum
DA human-made object that demonstrates technical skill and originality beyond everyday production
Dickie's definition has three components: (1) artifact — it must be a made or modified thing, excluding natural objects like sunsets; (2) conferred status — art status is bestowed by an institutional act, not possessed inherently; (3) candidate for appreciation — the work is put forward within the artworld context, but it need not actually be appreciated or be good. Option C is too restrictive (it requires positive evaluation); options A and D appeal to intrinsic properties (intent, beauty, skill) that the institutional theory explicitly rejects as defining conditions.
Question 3 True / False
According to the institutional theory of art, a technically brilliant, emotionally powerful painting automatically qualifies as art by virtue of its intrinsic aesthetic properties.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: False
The institutional theory breaks precisely with the claim that intrinsic properties — beauty, skill, expressiveness — determine art status. A technically brilliant painting that was never presented within any artworld context (say, found in an isolated community with no art institutions) would not qualify as art under the institutional theory, however beautiful it might be. Conversely, an object with no aesthetic merit can achieve art status if it is conferred by the artworld (as Duchamp's readymades demonstrate). Art status is entirely a function of social and institutional context, not intrinsic quality.
Question 4 True / False
The institutional theory explains why identical objects can have different art statuses based solely on their social and institutional context.
TTrue
FFalse
Answer: True
This is one of the institutional theory's key explanatory successes. Consider Duchamp's snow shovel ('In Advance of the Broken Arm') displayed in a gallery, versus an identical snow shovel in a hardware store. The institutional theory explains their different statuses straightforwardly: one was presented by an artist within the artworld as a candidate for appreciation; the other was not. Traditional intrinsic-property theories struggle with this case, because they cannot identify any property of the displayed shovel that the hardware store shovel lacks — beauty, craftsmanship, and expressiveness are identical in both.
Question 5 Short Answer
What is the most common objection to the institutional theory of art, and how do defenders typically respond?
Think about your answer, then reveal below.
Model answer: The most common objection is circularity: art is defined as what the artworld confers status on, and the artworld is defined as the institution that deals with art. The definition seems to turn in a circle without grounding art status in anything independent. Defenders (including Dickie) acknowledge the circularity but argue it is not vicious — it reflects that art is a socially constructed category, like money or law, whose definition is irreducibly bound up with the practices and institutions that sustain it. Just as 'money' cannot be defined without reference to banking institutions, 'art' cannot be defined without reference to the artworld.
Whether this response is satisfying is genuinely contested. Some philosophers argue that the institutional theory succeeds as a sociological description of how art status works in practice while failing as a philosophical explanation of why anything deserves art status. Others argue the circularity reveals that 'art' is not the kind of concept that admits a non-circular essential definition — a view consistent with Wittgenstein's 'family resemblance' approach. The institutional theory's lasting contribution is shifting the central question from 'what properties make something art?' to 'what social practices and contexts determine art status?' — a reframing that has proved more empirically fruitful than the search for intrinsic definitions.