Abstrakt
The idea of pluralistic artworld proposed by Arthur C. Danto is related to the question of beauty of art.
Beauty is not considered as part of essence of art anymore but it is still present in some artworks. Danto approaches this topic from the point of view of art definition in his book The Abuse of Beauty.
Danto offers us a distinction between internal and external beauty, i.e beauty which is integral to the meaning of artwork; and external which is only accidental and adds nothing to the meaning. Internal beauty is a part of artistic value whereas external beauty is not.
From this point of view, the internal beauty seems to be superior to external one however both kinds of beauty are present to our perception. This raises a question how we are supposed to respond to them.
However, Danto does not offer an answer. In order to offer a solution I focus on the article "The Narrative and the Ambient in Environmental Aesthetics" of Cheryl Foster.
Although Foster concerns with aesthetic value in nature and Danto with artistic value, I consider Foster's distinction of narrative and ambient dimension instrumental. I shall argue in accordance with Danto that the artistic value does not depend on beautiful features or other aesthetic qualities of the work.
However, I believe that aesthetic qualities external beauty included are relevant for aesthetic value of art. Secondly, I think necessary to tell the two kinds of beauty apart.
In Foster's terminology, a decision whether beauty is internal or external to an artwork is based on a particular narrative framework which is applied on artwork in question. The beauty which is not a part of the narrative (with respect to the meaning of the work), i.e. external beauty might be understood as part of ambient dimension similarly as it is the case with natural phenomenon.