This paper examines John Dewey's Art as Experience (1934), focusing on his argument that art is fundamentally functional rather than a mystified, autonomous object elevated beyond ordinary human understanding. The paper traces Dewey's critique of the "art for art's sake" tradition, his distinction between fine art treated as pure aesthetics versus art rooted in lived experience, and his use of the Parthenon as an illustrative example. It also draws a parallel with John Berger's theory of mystification under capitalism, and considers how Dewey's framework anticipates yet diverges from postmodernism. Ultimately, the paper argues that Dewey demystifies art by reconnecting it to its human creators and the social, cultural, and experiential conditions of its making.
In Art as Experience, John Dewey offers an alternative method through which aesthetic — or, as he sometimes writes, "esthetic" — theory can be discussed and thoroughly explained. In the midst of art studies dealing with the theme "art for art's sake," Dewey argues that a gradual deviation from this popular maxim will help art theorists, critics, and artists themselves develop a proper perspective in which works of art can be viewed and discussed for what they really are: products and artifacts of human culture.
Art as a functional object for human culture becomes the central theme of Art as Experience. The author places much emphasis on the distinction between fine art that is "mystified" and fine art that is functional. The former is the product of humanity placing a large premium on the art object rather than on experience, while the latter treats experience as the primary factor in creation and treats the object as a means to an end — which, ultimately, is human expression.
Art becomes a human product that is made autonomous from human society through what Dewey describes as a "separation" from the conditions of its origin and operation in experience. As he writes, "a wall is built around them that renders almost opaque their general significance . . . Art is remitted to a separate realm, where it is cut off from that association with the materials and aims of every other form of human effort, undergoing, and achievement" (3).
This passage conveys the primary message of the book. Dewey offers a critical perspective on the process of mystification of works of art, in much the same way that cultural critic John Berger has elucidated the mystification that becomes an inevitable result of a capitalist economic system. In Berger's thesis, works of art are elevated to a status that goes beyond ordinary human understanding and experience. This process of mystification makes works of art accessible only to those who are able to "understand" and possess these objects, thus rendering them unavailable and incomprehensible to the very people upon whose lives and experiences the works were based and created.
This should not be the case, Dewey argues. As each chapter progresses, he develops his argument that art is initially and primarily functional rather than purely aesthetic. For him, "[a]rt denotes a process of doing or making," and works of art are a manifestation of human experience from a particular period in time. He further defines art as "something with some physical material . . . and with a view to production of something visible, audible, or tangible" (47).
"Parthenon illustrates art's social and functional origins"
"Dewey anticipates postmodernism but stays grounded"
As a final note, the author provides his readers with a discussion of how the study of art and fine art products themselves can be re-experienced and demystified, paving the way for a deeper understanding of human society. Dewey asserts: "[w]ere art an acknowledged power in human association and not treated as the pleasuring of an idle moment or as a means of ostentatious display . . . the problem of the relation of art and morals would not exist" (348). In sum, John Dewey's Art as Experience offers a welcome respite from aesthetic theory that continually mystifies art and renders it inaccessible and incomprehensible to the very society it emerges from and speaks to.
You’re 60% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.