The Art Instinct_ Beauty, Pleasure, & Human Evolution - Denis Dutton [138]
Kant disparages “finery” in section 14 of The Critique of Judgment, Kant (1987). Bell’s weird remark about people of discernment not noticing repre sen ta tion in painting is in Art (1958), pp. 29–30.
Wittgenstein’s comment about the human soul is in the Philosophical Investigations (1958), part 2, section iv. The Miller observation is in (2000), p. 356.
CHAPTER 8: INTENTION, FORGERY, DADA:
THREE AESTHETIC PROBLEMS
Darwin’s great two-volume work, The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication (1896b) should, along with The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1896c), be much more widely known.
Wimsatt and Beardsley (1946), [w/s wimsatt beardsley intentional fallacy]; The Possibility of Criticism, Beardsley (1970), pp. 19–20. See Barthes (1977); Foucault (1969); Derrida (1983).
See Bunzel (1929); Stern (1980). A classic collection of bad verse is Wyndham-Lewis and Lee (2003). The Akenside quotation is in Beardsley (1970), p. 20.
See Nehamas (1981), p. 145; also Nehamas (1987).
Research discussed by Paul Bloom in Descartes’ Baby shows that children aged three or four have a strong, spontaneous sense of the intention behind repre sen ta tions and communicative acts. Whether a circle with a straight line coming down from it is a lollipop or a balloon depends for the child not on resemblance but on represented intent. Bloom adds that “a good way to make a child cry is to take a picture [drawn by the child] that is described as ‘Mommy’ and insist that it is a picture of someone else—the child’s brother, say. Children resent this; they know it is a picture of Mommy because that is the person they intend it to depict.” See Bloom (2004), p. 78.
For accounts of van Meegeren’s career, see Werness (1983), Wynne (2006), and Lopez (2008). The best recent book on the subject is from Edward Dolnick (2008). The quotation from Bredius is in Dutton (1983), pp. 30–31; the van Meegeren quotation (obviously, to some degree an invention) is from Wynne (2006), p. 164. Mills and Mansfield (1979) provide a good general overview of forgery. For more on the van Meegeren episode, with plenty of illustrations, see [w/s meegeren Vermeer fakes]. Koestler (1955) gives the earliest version of his argument; it appeared in other venues in subsequent years. Nelson Goodman first wrote on forgery in The Languages of Art (1968); the section on forgery is anthologized in Dutton (1983).
Hebborn’s autobiography may include more than the usual quota of invention, but it is an entertaining book (1993). There is other material available on the Web, including my obituary of Hebborn, from which I have drawn for this discussion; see [w/s hebborn fakes forgery dutton].
The best general account of the Hatto affair to date is Mark Singer’s New Yorker article (2007), see [w/s mark singer joyce hatto]. I have drawn on my own New York Times op-ed (2007) for this discussion. Andrys Basten has produced an extensive Web bibliography [w/s hatto hoax log]. The most absurd story still in circulation about the affair has it that Hatto’s recording-engineer husband, William Barrington-Coupe, who had previously served prison time for fraud, faked the recordings out of love for his ailing wife. He now claims she was unaware of what was going on and believed she’d actually made the CDs. This is certainly false; there is not the slightest doubt that she was in on the hoax from the start. Hatto was a witty, intelligent woman in command of her faculties till the end. She knew full well that she had not recorded with a large symphony orchestra (at a local disused cinema!) the complete concertos of Brahms, Chopin, Mendelssohn, Schumann, and Rachmaninoff, plus threeconcertos by Saint-Saëns, the Tchaikovsky B-flat minor, Grieg’s A-minor, etc. As for whether Barrington-Coupe loved