George Dickie, “A Tale of Two Artworlds” (and Arthur Danto, "Responses and Replies")

George Dickie, “A Tale of Two Artworlds,” in Danto and his critics, ed. Mark Rollins (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993), 73-78.

Respond to Danto's critiques/misunderstandings in “The Artworld Revisited: Comedies of Similarity” and comment on his approach
Different versions of the artworld
How does the prescribing of artistic status take place?
Artworld is not a homogeneous empowering elite of experts
Dickie stresses the role of the artist
“My basic claim is that the artworld is a structure of roles within which artists create art.”
Artworld relations
Danto: “the Art World as the historically ordered world of artworks, enfranchised by theories which themselves are historically ordered.”
Does Danto actually argue that a group confers the status of art, or is he concerned with “what is required for someone to realize that a certain kind of thing can be a work of art”?

Arthur Danto, “Responses and Replies,” in Danto and his critics, ed. Mark Rollins (Oxford: Blackwell, 1993), 193-216.  

“a world consisting of works of art, a self-enriching community of ontologically complex objects, often inter-referential [... intertextual ...] and which above all had a historical vector, so that something could be part of that world at one time but not at an earlier time.”
“Discourse of reasons”
Seeing something as art VS being art
“I don't believe any institutional theory gives us a definition of art, simply a certain account of how something gets to be received as art.”
Also, therefore, a factor in the creation of art: “artist and audience are caught up together in the evolving discourse of reasons.”
Historical /cultural factors
Institutionalism =/= ontology, and Danto is more interested in creating ontologies than sociologies
Dickie, on the other hand, attempts to make his institutional theory also a definition/ontology