Art Criticism as Categorical Reasoning
Location
PANEL: Intersections in Art, Philosophy, and Place
Wilder 101
Moderator: Kipp Colvin
Document Type
Presentation - Open Access
Start Date
5-1-2026 4:30 PM
End Date
5-1-2026 3:30 PM
Abstract
In this paper, I offer an interpretation of Kendall Walton’s framework of art appreciation in Categories of Art. According to Walton, in order to appreciate an artwork, we must perceive it as belonging to some artistic ‘category’, because categorization determines which features of an object are aesthetically relevant. Different categorizations of the same object, then, can produce different artworks. I’ll argue for a bipartite analysis, where the intended categories of an art object can come apart from the categories through which the object is the most aesthetically valuable work, and that which way of categorizing is ‘correct’ depends on our goals of engagement with the work. I’ll then argue, following Anthony Cross’s Criticism as Practical Reasoning, that one function of criticism is to help us identify the right categories to apply to art objects. Critics also have (at least) two other important roles to play in our categorical engagement with art: criticism can help us engage with categories we previously didn’t appreciate, and some critics can categorically innovate, arguing for the application of new categories to existing art objects. Finally, I’ll explore cases in which the same object can exist in both aesthetic and non-aesthetic categories, explaining how these objects can seem to be both art and not art.
Keywords:
Philosophy, Aesthetics, Art critique
Recommended Citation
Jester, Madeline, "Art Criticism as Categorical Reasoning" (2026). Research Symposium. 23.
https://digitalcommons.oberlin.edu/researchsymp/2026/presentations/23
Major
Philosophy; Mathematics
Project Mentor(s)
Katherine Thomson-Jones, Philosophy
2026
Art Criticism as Categorical Reasoning
PANEL: Intersections in Art, Philosophy, and Place
Wilder 101
Moderator: Kipp Colvin
In this paper, I offer an interpretation of Kendall Walton’s framework of art appreciation in Categories of Art. According to Walton, in order to appreciate an artwork, we must perceive it as belonging to some artistic ‘category’, because categorization determines which features of an object are aesthetically relevant. Different categorizations of the same object, then, can produce different artworks. I’ll argue for a bipartite analysis, where the intended categories of an art object can come apart from the categories through which the object is the most aesthetically valuable work, and that which way of categorizing is ‘correct’ depends on our goals of engagement with the work. I’ll then argue, following Anthony Cross’s Criticism as Practical Reasoning, that one function of criticism is to help us identify the right categories to apply to art objects. Critics also have (at least) two other important roles to play in our categorical engagement with art: criticism can help us engage with categories we previously didn’t appreciate, and some critics can categorically innovate, arguing for the application of new categories to existing art objects. Finally, I’ll explore cases in which the same object can exist in both aesthetic and non-aesthetic categories, explaining how these objects can seem to be both art and not art.
