542
PARTISAN REVIEW
end of hi s book Goodman says, on the ques tion of merit , "T o say
tha t a work of art is good o r even to say how good it is does not a fter
a ll p rovide much information .
It
does not tell us whether th e wo rk is
evocative, robu st, vibrant o r exqui sitely desi gned and still less wha t
are its salient specific qua lities of co lo r, shape or sound. Mo reover,
wo rks of art are not raceho rses and picking a winner is not a primary
goa l. "
R osenberg:
So far , so good.
T umin:
Goodman then goes on , " Ra ther than judgments o f p arti cul ar
characteri sti cs being a mere means towa rd an ultima te appra isa l,
judgments of aestheti c va lue a re o ften means toward di scovering
such ch aracteri stics.
If
a conno isseur tell s me tha t one of two
Cycl adi c idol s tha t seem
to
me a lmos t indistinguish abl e is much
fin er than th e o ther, thi s in spires me
to
look fo r and may help me
find the signifi cant differences between the two. Es tima tes of excel–
lence a re among the minor a ids
to
in sight. Judgin g the excell ence o f
works o f art o r the goodness of peopl e is no t the bes t way o f
understanding them. And the criteri on o f aes theti c merit is no mo re
the majo r a im of aes theti cs than the criter io n o f virtue is the majo r
a im o f psycho logy." Would you agree with tha t?
R osenberg:
Yes, I'd agree with tha t. T hey' re a ll nega tive sta tements.
T umin:
But you 're bo th rea ll y di sca rd ing wha t o ther peop le would
like to attribute to you o r to aes theti cian s.
R osen berg:
Aestheti cian s don 't make judgments on works of art, they
develo p theori es about aesth eti cs.
Tum in:
Let me turn
to
tha t doma in call ed aes theti cs because, in a
ro ugh way, art is in th e doma in of the aestheti c. Are there no specia l
terms th a t di stingui sh the doma in in which your enterprise as a criti c
is loca ted from the terms whi ch peopl e use for o th er doma ins? Isn 't
there a specifi abl e set of concern s th a t you as a criti c take on and tha t
o the r peopl e have found va luable, and your writin g a bo ut them
sufficientl y info rma tive and excell ent
to
wish
to
hea r mo re from you
abo ut those parti cul ar kinds o f ques ti on s?
R osen berg:
I don 't know wh a t those ques ti on s a re. I think th ey' ve a ll
di sintegrated .
If
you look a t th e a rt in th e pas t twenty years, it's
extremely diffi cult to say tha t an ything is left over from th e o ld
bea uty and truth fo rmul a ti on. Fo r one thin g, art is def initely no t
concerned with beauty. Wha t is it concerned with ? It 's a lmos t
imposs ibl e to say. T he onl y definiti on I could think o f in recent yea rs
was to say tha t it's concerned with an ything tha t isn 't in the ca tego ry
of something else. It has become a doma in outside o ther doma ins.
