Reply to Ryckman Author(s): George Dickie Source: The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, Vol. 47, No.

2 (Spring, 1989), p. 177 Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of The American Society for Aesthetics Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/431831 Accessed: 01/04/2009 15:35
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The American Society for Aesthetics and Blackwell Publishing are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism.

http://www.jstor.org

Discussion to conceive of examples outside the realm of art whereunmoved,untouchedobjectsareused to servea purpose. Here are three such examples. NE8: A says to B, "Note that piece of driftwood. If, when you returnlatertodayit is gone, I've gone to town, and if not, then I've gone sailing." When B returnsto find the driftwood wherehe andA last saw it, he will have been informedthatA has gone sailing. NE9: A uses the cliff in NE1 as a markerso that she knows whatpartof the beachto returnto when her sailing is over. NE10: B uses a large maple tree nearthe beach as shade so that he can wait for A without getting even more sunburnedthan he alreadyis. In each of NE8, NE9 and NE10 an untouched, unmovedobject is used to serve a purpose. Of course, since I contend that the objects in NE1 throughNE7 and the object in E7 are being used to serve a purpose, I should be ready to specify that purpose. Dickie has made this an easy task; for, where P is the purposefor which the object in E5 was used, P will do as the purposefor which the objectsin the new examples and the object in E7 were used. Assuming, of course, thatthe object in E5 was used to serve a purpose. Finally, since I hold thatthe objects in E7 and NE1 as throughNE7 arejust as qualified for artifactuality the object in E5, Dickie mightdemandthatI say what "complex object" they became as a result of the artists' behavior. Anyone of the following three "complexobject"types will do: 1. Workof art. 2. Objectregarded(or used) as a workof art. 3. Objectused to distractor worry philosophersof art. It seems likely that if the object in E5 is now a "complex object," then it too is a "complex object" of one of the above "complexobject" types. One mightobject that a crucialelementof Dickie's analysis of artifactualityis absent from A, that it is not simply in virtue of being used but in virtue of fies as an artifactand complex object. This objection seems wide of the mark; for Dickie has not told us what this special way of using might be, and careful
being used in some special way that an object quali-

177 reflectionon E5, E7, and NE1 throughNE7 suggests that any attempt to do so would not save Dickie's analysis. Even if there is a special way of using, the object in E5 is not used in this special way until it is resting on the wall. It is not at all unreasonableto claim that the objects in E7 and NE1 through NE7 may be used in exactly the same special way even thoughthey are not transported.Moving and hanging on a wall are not necessary to using in whatever special way Dickie might have in mind. Moving and hanging are merely ways of making such use more convenientandpractical. I have not arguedthatthe object in E7 or any of the objects in NE1 through NE7 are artifacts, but only thatthey havejust as much a claim to artifactualityas the object in E5. Unless I am mistaken, Dickie's views about artifactuality are problematic and we shouldrefrainfrom acceptingAC.4
THOMAS C. RYCKMAN

LawrenceUniversity
1. George Dickie, The Art Circle (New York: Haven, 1984). All quotationsare from this work. 2. George Dickie, Artand the Aesthetic(Cornell University Press, 1974). 3. E7 is my own summaryof an examplethatDickie cites throughoutthe chapterwhere he gives El through E6. El throughE6 are presentedon pages 44 through46. 4. I wish to thankan anonymousJAAC referee for helpful commentson an earlierdraft.

Reply to Ryckman
1. I did not give an analysis of artifactuality. 2. I did not speak in a general way of "used to serve a purpose" or "the intention that it might be used to serve a purpose." I spoke in a specific way of Dali's rocks: "The rocks are not altered in any way by the 'pointing and calling.' Nor are the rocks used in any way similar to the way in which driftwood may be used to dig a hole in the sand or the like or the way in which Duchampused the famous urinal."
GEORGE DICKIE

University of Illinois, Chicago

Editor's Note
The Discussion section of the Journalreplaces "Afterwords:Criticism and Countertheses." The change in name is meant to indicate a broadening in scope of this forum for the discussion of issues in theoretical aesthetics and art criticism. Submissions need not be restrictedto critical comments on previous articles in the Journal(althoughwe continue to welcome these), but may extend to issues raised in otherjournals and books. We are also willing to consider self-containedessays that are not of article length (up to 10 manuscriptpages). Authorsshould follow the regularinstructionsfor the preparationand submission of manuscripts(see page 2 of this issue), keeping footnotes to an absolute minimum, and indicatingin a cover letterthatthe submission is intendedfor the Discussion section of the Journal. We expect to be able to publish discussion entries within a few monthsof their acceptance, and we look forwardto receiving your submissions.