[ES] Este trabajo, realiza una sumarísima revisión histórica, a través de algunas conjeturas epistemológicas, sobre las reflexiones filosóficas acerca del mundo del arte, su estatuto, desarrollo y «funcionamiento» con el propósito de allanar el camino para una ulterior descripción de la problemática acerca de la noción del mundo del arte. [EN] This writing makes a brief historical review, through some epistemological assumptions, on the philosophical reflections on the art world, its status, development and «functioning» in order to pave the way (...) for a further description of the problems about the notion of the art world. (shrink)

In this article, I argue that our ontology of art has undergone a major change in the course of modern history. While we currently think of artworks as parts arranged in a certain way, there was a time when artworks were thought of as metaphysically more akin to ordinary artefacts such as tables and chairs; that is, as wholes having replaceable parts. This change in our ontology of art is reflected in our approach to art restoration. But what explains the (...) change? I will suggest that the change took place because of a change in our conception of the function of art. More specifically, I will suggest that we have started to think of artworks as parts arranged in a certain way, because we have started to think of artworks as having, primarily, an aesthetic function. (shrink)

This paper examines some of the philosophical positions explaining the interpretation of artwork as related to its ontology and the concept of creativity. A theory of interpretation necessarily involves a certain ontological position answering questions such as: What is the object of interpretation?; What is a work of art? The same close relation one can find between a theory of interpretation and the creativity, i.e. the questions such as In what sense (if at all) is a work of art created?; (...) What is created by an artist and what by the observer/reader/listener of a work of art?. Our interpretation and its results depend on answers to these questions. In conclusion the author gives an outline of his own position on the interpretation of a work of art in the context of the creativity and the ontology of the former. (shrink)