An Analysis of Theory Art and Post-Theory Art: Artists, Art Theorists, and Art Critics on Relationships and Connections Communicated Through Theories Across Artistic Disciplines

“I [see] . . . connections where others have not” A. Rodin, late 19th Century, France (emphasis added). Pictured is his piece Les Trois Ombres, 1886. Rodin as an artist arguably made works that are examples of both Theory Art and Post-Theory Art.

I. Introduction And Definitions

1. Theory Art and Post-Theory Art as an Aesthetic Discourse as Noted by Both Academics and Artists

Historical research into (a) statements by artists and (b) the writings of art philosophers and art theorists suggests that there existed an emergent, unlabeled, “theory art” in the nineteenth, twentieth, and twenty-first centuries. The same research also suggests a similar emergence, also unlabeled, of “post-theory art” in the early twenty-first century.

The historical research also suggests related points. The research suggests that theory art and post-theory art both fall easily within definitions of ‘art’ as proposed by theorists and philosophers of art, particularly in the last century.

The research also suggests that, while theory art and post-theory art are related to other movements in the past two centuries (conceptual art, post-conceptualism, minimalism, post-minimalism, modern art, post-modernism), theory art and post-theory art are nonetheless conceptually and aesthetically distinct, including in categorical ways recognized as distinct by artists, art academics, art historians, and art critics who work in the areas of art theory and the philosophy of art.

The research also suggests that theory art and post-theory art, even before their emergence in the West in the nineteenth century, has manifested everywhere, across different countries, continents, cultures, and time; and also across almost all artistic disciplines, including visual art, music, literature, theater, film, non-fiction writing, text-based art, poetry, performance art, happenings, and architecture.

This paper explores these points from the research on these topics to date, including in relation to what some well-known artists and art theorists have said themselves.

2. Defining Theory Art and Post-Theory Art

a. Theory Art

Theory art is an artistic approach that engages with theories and explores relationships and connections. It transcends traditional boundaries between art, philosophical inquiry, reason, and observation, including through approaches similar to the scientific method, with its proposals, hypotheses, testings, and revisions through observations and hypotheses.

Instead of focusing on one idea, feeling, or event, singularly, it focuses on the possible relationships between things — the connections — that may exist between many things, and often very different things. It invites viewers (or listeners, or readers) to actively participate in the interpretation process, to make meaning — but not just about singular feelings, thoughts, or events, but rather about how they might be all be connected at certain times and in certain places— theories about many things might relate.

Theory art challenges the conventional limitations placed upon artists and audiences. In most circumstances, artists and audiences are co-creators of meaning about discrete things that are often in isolation. Theory art, in contrast, allows artists and audiences to be co-creators of meaning about the connections between thoughts, feelings, events, even when they are normally considered to be entirely different unrelated things. Stated differently, theory art offers viewers, listeners, and readers to contemplate and interpret possible connections and relationships in order to transcend singular meanings. Many traditions, perspectives, fields of study, and causal relationships, all at once, instead of just one, for more nuanced audience interpretations of creative works.

by positioning the viewer as more than just a co-creator of meaning; in theory art, the recipient viewer-listener-reader is a co-creator of connections and relationships to transcend singular meanings.

What is theory art? Artists say it best:

“I [see] . . . connections where others have not.” (A. Rodin, late 19th Century, France) (emphasis added).

“The function of the artist is to make people see the connections between things, to reveal the invisible relations.” (P. Klee, early 20th Century, Switzerland) (emphasis added).

In theory art, the artist and the audience see what relationships might be possible or not, and why or why not.

b. Post-Theory Art

Post-Theory Art, in relation to theory art, appears to be more about the questioning of theories, or questioning through theories, with doubt, uncertainty, and curiosity rather than assertions of certainty.

What is post-theory art? Artists say it best, according to these quotes attributed to them:

“The relationship between what we see and what we know is never settled.” — John Berger (English art critic, novelist, painter and poet, Ways of Seeing, 1972, UK) (emphasis added).

“Theories are traps for the artist. Artists can never be too careful of their theories. They can lose their way.” — Joseph Beuys (German artist and art theorist, mid 20th Century) (emphasis added).

“There are relations between various forces, visible and invisible, that must be discovered [and questioned].” — Wassily Kandinsky (Russian painter and art theorist, Concerning the Spiritual in Art, 1912) (emphasis added).

In all of this, a key point. Theory art and post-theory art are not art theory, nor only about art theory. Rather, theory art and post-theory art utilize theories as a way to express. Once again, an artist says it best about theory art and post-theory art:

“The . . . artist does not theorize about art, but instead creates relationships through their work.” — attributed to Brâncuși, C., early 20th Century, Romania) (emphasis added).

There will be more on what theory art is, and what post-theory art is, later in this research essay.

3. Universal Language Methods as Evidence That There Is Theory Art and Post-Theory Art, Even if Not Named As Such

As shown above, theory art and post-theory art are each about the creator and the receiver seeing and making of possible relationships and connections about different thoughts, feelings, events, and things. And as other research papers have suggested, the universality of the use of figurative language methods, across languages and cultures, and across times, reflects a shared human cognitive ability that enables humans to make and express connections between different things, even when wildly different and not normally thought to be related.

This universal cognitive ability, manifested across all languages and cultures, is foundational to all artistic expression, and it is particularly foundational to theory art and post-theory art. Artists practicing theory art and post-theory art, in the context of works involving language and the communication of theories though language (such as by text-based visual art, music lyrics, spoken word storytelling, and literature and poetry) may be seen to employ universally-observed language methods such as simile, analogy, rhetoric, hyperbole, allegory, parable, synecdoche, metonymy, allusion, and wordplay to create works that challenge viewers to engage deeply with the underlying theories and concepts between things that might seem so different and unrelated as to have no connection at all.

In the context of theory art and post-theory art, the above language methods may be seen as tools no different than the paintbrush or the sculptor’s knife; they allow for the creation of artistic pieces that are not just visually striking or musically compelling but also precise and intellectually stimulating, encouraging the audience to think critically about the connections being drawn. As just two examples, synecdoche and metonymy allow artists practicing theory art and post-theory art to represent larger ideas through smaller, related elements, making complex concepts and complex proposals of relationships more accessible and more abstract at the same time, creating their own aesthetic, somewhat like minimalism, in addition to their substantive meaning as interpreted by the open receiver — the viewer, listener, reader — the curious audience.

II. Influential Artists, Academics, and Philosophers Saw Theory Art and Post-Theory Art As Real, Even Though They Did Not Name It.

1. Art Theorist and Art Critic Arthur Danto, the ‘Atmosphere’ of Artistic Theory, and Theory Art

The art critic and philosopher Arthur Danto worked in several philosophical fields, including aesthetics and the philosophy of art. Twice awarded fellowships from the Guggenheim Foundation, and a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, Danto argued that one of the purposes of philosophy, including the philosophy of art, is to examine indiscernible differences and relationships. Danto was describing theory art and post-theory art, even though he did not put a name to it.

As part of this, Danto proposed a definition of art — a definition of what ‘art’ is — using these words: Art is whatever artists consider to be art. As discussed in related research papers, this relates to the words of the artist Bruce Nauman: “If I was an artist and I was in the studio, then whatever I was doing in the studio must be art.” (Nauman, B., Art Now: Interviews with Modern Artists, Cummings, P., editor (New York: Abbeville Press, 1977, p. 12).

In turn, as also discussed in related research papers, this all relates to a fundamental aspect — almost a syllogism — of both theory art and post-theory art:

(A) If whatever an artist does constitutes art, then it follows that:

(B) Whatever an artist thinks also constitutes art, including because:

(C) As Danto proposed, art is whatever artists consider to be art.

Danto later explained that such art exists in “an atmosphere of art theory.” (Danto, A., “The Artworld,” The Journal of Philosophy 61, no. 19 (1964): pp. 571–584. Since then, sources including the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy have explained Danto’s definition of art with additional language that describes theory art and post-theory art, even if not labeled as such: “Danto’s definition has been [summarized] as follows: something is a work of art if [it] . . . . engages audience participation in filling in what is missing [including relationships and connections] . . . . where the work in question and the interpretations thereof require [relational] context.”

2. Jacques Derrida and Roland Barthes: Deconstruction and Meaning

Like Danto, above, Jacques Derrida and Roland Barthes have also provided significant groundwork for understanding theory art and post-theory art, through their exploration of text, language, meaning, and viewer interpretation.

Derrida’s theories of deconstruction emphasize the role of the viewer in creating meaning, challenging fixed interpretations of texts and artworks. Artists practicing theory art often align with this view, creating works across artist disciplines that anticipate and actively encourage the viewer-listener-reader’s active engagement in the interpretative process. This is not unique to theory art and post-theory art, but these elements are in what may be called theory art and post-theory art. (See generally Graves, The Role of Aesthetics in the Institutional Theory of Art (Journal of Aesthetic Art Criticism, 202, United States).

Similarly, Barthes’s conception of the “death of the author” (meaning, it is not the creator that makes the meaning of a work, rather it is the audience-receiver) emphasizes, like Derrida and Danto, the viewer’s role in constructing meaning. Barthes’s view, that interpretation of a creative work is not solely determined by the creator, but by the interaction between the work and its audience, not only reinforces Derrida’s work but encapsulates something that is at the heart of theory art and post-theory art: the emphasis on active engagement of the viewer-listener-reader as an intellectual and cognitive participant, even partner, and the dynamic, not static, creation of meanings about relationships and connections between things.

Again, an artist is attributed to have said it best, even though it was not known as theory art or post-theory art at the time: “The function of the artist is to make people see the connections between things, to reveal the invisible relations.” (Paul Klee, early 20th Century, Switzerland).

3. Rosalind Krauss and Postmodern Critique

Rosalind Krauss’s critiques of postmodernism also expanded the boundaries of traditional artistic interpretation, and, as such, they also serve as some of the theoretical foundations of theory art and post-theory art. Krauss’s work and theories challenged conventional narratives in art history, arguing for a more inclusive and a more critical approach to understanding artistic expression. Among other things, her work emphasized the importance of context and the interplay of multiple narratives in the creation and reception of art (See generally Antunes, P., On Computational Ecosystems in Media Arts (Leonardo, Portugal, 2016). This multiplicity — be it of narratives, causal factors, or things connected or related — is one of the foundations of theory art and text-based art.

Krauss’s postmodern analysis, which argues for the need for critical engagement with art that considers the social, political, and historical context of an artist’s work, is parallel to the analyses in many works of theory art and post-theory art, which embody and invite considerations of context in interpreting theoretical explorations of complex relationships and connections through an artist’s practice (Antunes, supra.)

Here again, an artist is attributed to have said it best — about not just connections but their context: “I invent nothing, I rediscover. Seeing connections where others have not” (Rodin, A., late 19th Century, France).

4. Ludwig Wittgenstein, Hegel, and Descartes: Philosophical Foundations

Well-known Western philosophers such as Wittgenstein, Hegel, and Descartes have also contributed to the conceptual foundations and frameworks of theory art by examining the complexities of language, thought, and perception. Wittgenstein’s insights into language in relation to the nature of meaning mirror theory art’s exploration of communication, relationships, connections, and interpretation (See generally Dodd, J. Ludwig Wittgenstein and the Complexity of Language. Philosophical Investigations, 2017, UK).

More specifically, Wittgenstein’s exploration of language as a social practice emphasizes the fluidity of meaning and the role of context, and the role of relationships as context, in shaping interpretation. This philosophical and intellectual perspective supports the idea that art, like language, is a dynamic and context-dependent form of communication that includes not just declarations of what is but exploration of relationships and connections as to what may be. (Dodd, J., supra). John Berger, the English art critic, novelist, painter, and poet, and the author of the influential art criticism essay “Ways of Seeing,” is reported to have said it best: When it comes to art and artistic creation, “The relationship between what we see and what we know is never settled.” (Berger, J. 1972, UK). Stated differently, relationships, because they are never settled, are always open to new theories, new questions about theories, and new ways of seeing connections between things that might not yet have been thought to be connected before.

5. John Cage and Miles Davis: Music as Theory Art and Post-Theory Art

The empirical evidence shows that theory art and post-theory art is not just in visual art; it is in all types of artistic and aesthetic disciplines. Take music for example. Consider John Cage’s theoretical — and applied theory — explorations of new conceptions of audience interpretation in music composition. And consider Miles Davis’s innovative theoretical — and applied theory — approaches to musical improvisation. Their work was not just musical notes or musical compositions — their work was proposing and testing theories through music.

Theories proposed, expressed, tested, and given to an audience through an artistic medium, be it a painting or a plain-text work or music as with Cage and Davis: This is theory art and post-theory art. Lest there be any doubt, these artists in the artistic discipline of music not only made and proposed theories; they tested their theories by leaving it to their audiences to interpret their music, and their compositions, and their theories; they left it to their audiences to make meaning, through their music-based theories, about the relationships between things (for example, Cage’s placing it on the listener to evaluate the relationship between the idea of ‘music,’ the reality of silence, and what meaning there was, if any).

And yet another relational level to theory art: Davis and Cage, with their theoretical work in composition, improvisation, sound, and silence challenged existing theories and norms and assumptions of musical structure. And still another relational level: Davis’s emphasis on improvisation and the spontaneous creation of music reflects theory art’s focus on process and the fluidity of meaning due to relational components. He was not speaking about music, but artist Robert Rauschenberg said it best: “Theories are tools; art is an act of discovery.” (Rauschenberg, R. Late 20th Century, USA). Stated differently, theory art and post-theory art, be it inside a piece of music or a piece of text-based art, uses theories as the vehicle to discover relationships and connections. It’s not art about art theory; it’s theory that is expressed as art, proposed through art, tested through art — when it is received by the audience-listener-viewer-reader.

6. Conceptual Art and Minimalism: Theoretical Influences

The influence of Conceptual Art and Minimalism on theory art is also noteworthy. To the extent that Conceptual Art can be reduced to a phrase, it may be said to focus on ideas and theoretical concepts, rather than pure beauty (Baldessari, 1960s, USA), which closely aligns with the essence of theory art and post-theory art, which, as stated use artistic manifestations for exploring the relationships between ideas, thoughts, feelings, events, and anything else felt or observable. (See generally Rijmen, F., et al. 2002, Belgium. The Relationship Between Ideas and Manifestations in Conceptual Art. Art Theory Quarterly).

Meanwhile, Minimalism’s emphasis on simplicity and purity resonates with theory art’s — and particularly post-theory art’s — focus on distilling complex concepts and multi-variable theories into accessible forms of expression, proposal, documentation, critique, and, in post-theory art, questioning through earnest doubt and the uncertainty of true curiosity. In this sense, Minimalism’s and Post-minimalism’s focus on the essential elements of form and content parallels theory art’s and post-theory art’s ability to convey and question the true core of the elements of a given theory or proposed relationship or perceived connection between things. (See generally Burstein, J. 1990, United States. Minimalism and the Distillation of Complex Concepts. Art & Design Magazine).

7. Literature and Poetry in Theory Art

Literature and poetry have long been intertwined with theoretical exploration, providing a rich terrain for theory art. Writers and poets such as James Joyce and T.S. Eliot have incorporated complex theoretical concepts into their works, challenging readers to engage with the text on multiple levels. These literary practices resonate with theory art’s emphasis on textual and interpretive depth (Best, S. 2006, United States. The Death of the Author: A Reconsideration. Literature and Philosophy Quarterly).

In post-theory art, literature and poetry continue to serve as vehicles for exploring theoretical questions, often blurring the boundaries between written and visual forms. Contemporary artists incorporate textual elements into their works, creating layered narratives that invite viewers to engage with the text as a visual and conceptual element (See generally Best, S. 2006, United States. The Death of the Author: A Reconsideration. Literature and Philosophy Quarterly).

Marc Chagall is reported to have expressed a related idea: “Theories in art are often reflections of the artist’s own mind rather than the work itself, which is born from the heart.” (Chagall, M. Mid 20th Century, Belarus/France).

Architecture as Theory Art

Architecture offers a unique perspective on theory art through its capacity to embody theoretical concepts in physical form. The work of architects like Zaha Hadid challenges conventional forms and structures, reflecting the disruptive nature of theory art in redefining artistic expression and meaning (See generally Wadle, E. 2023, United Kingdom. Zaha Hadid: Architecture and the Disruption of Form. Architectural Review).

In post-theory art, architecture continues to explore the relationship between space and theory, with practitioners incorporating digital technologies and experimental designs to create environments that challenge traditional notions of architectural practice. These explorations reflect the interdisciplinary nature of post-theory art, merging architectural innovation with conceptual inquiry (cf. Wadle, E. 2023, United Kingdom. Zaha Hadid: Architecture and the Disruption of Form. Architectural Review).

Film and Post-Theory Art

Film has emerged as a powerful medium for exploring the themes of theory art and post-theory art. Filmmakers like Jean-Luc Godard and David Lynch have employed narrative complexity and visual abstraction to challenge viewers’ perceptions and invite interpretation, aligning with the principles of theory art (See generally Grauer, V. 1996, France. Toward a Unified Theory of the Arts. MTO).

In post-theory art, film continues to push boundaries by integrating elements of performance and interactivity, creating immersive experiences that encourage viewers to engage with the medium in novel ways. These explorations highlight the potential for film to serve as a platform for interdisciplinary inquiry and theoretical exploration (Grauer, supra).

Plays/Theatre and Theory Art

Theatre has long been a site for the exploration of theoretical concepts, with playwrights like Samuel Beckett and Bertolt Brecht using the stage to challenge audience perceptions and convey complex ideas. These practices align with theory art’s emphasis on viewer engagement and the exploration of meaning (See generally Rousell, D. 2019, Australia. Inhuman Forms of Life: On Art as a Problem for Post-Qualitative Research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education).

In post-theory art, theatre continues to evolve, incorporating elements of performance art and multimedia to create hybrid forms that challenge traditional distinctions between disciplines. These practices reflect post-theory art’s focus on interdisciplinary exploration and the integration of diverse perspectives (Rousell, supra). Bridget Riley is reported to have noted the importance of this dynamic: “The relationship between the artist and the viewer is a dynamic, changing one, dependent on the work of art itself” (Riley, B. Late 20th Century, UK).

Performance Art and Post-Theory Art

Performance art serves as a dynamic platform for the exploration of theory art and post-theory art, with practitioners using the body as a medium for conveying complex ideas and engaging with audiences in real-time. Artists like Marina Abramović and Chris Burden have used performance to challenge conventional boundaries and explore the relationship between artist and viewer. In post-theory art, performance continues to evolve, incorporating digital technologies and interactive elements to create immersive environments that challenge traditional notions of artistic practice. These explorations reflect the interdisciplinary nature of post-theory art, merging performance with conceptual inquiry. The French writer, photographer, installation artist, and conceptual artist Sophie Calle is reported to have said it best: “The relationships between objects and people can often reveal more than the objects or people themselves.” (Calle, S. Late 20th Century, France).

Conclusion

The exploration of theory art and post-theory art suggests that these forms may indeed exist as distinct artistic expressions and even as distinct artistic movements. Through the contributions of philosophers, artists, art theorists, and art critics, across artistic disciplines, mediums, and movements, theory art and post-theory art may be seen as an expansion of the philosophic questions “what is art?” — an expansion that continues to evolve now, in real-time, in this century. As the discourse around theory art and post-theory expands, including critiques of it — is is really that different than conceptual art? — has it really already been in our presence? — is theory art related to humans and human-made theories? — it appears that, whatever it is called, artists will continue to propose, discuss, critique, and test theories through artistic mediums — theories as vehicles for art, and art as vehicles for theories — all the while inviting viewers to participate actively in creating meaning not just of ideas, but of relationships and connections between things, be it between ideas, thoughts, feelings, emotions, events — anything. The evidence summarized in this paper, including quotes attributed to artists, supports the existence of theory art and post-theory art, and thereby also supports the premise that there should be a growing degree of art world and historical recognition of their existence, and their significance, in the art histories of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.

Tentative References and Quotations (Subject To Final Review)

1. Adajian, Thomas. “The Definition of Art,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, first published October 23, 2007; substantive revision July 30, 2024, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/art-definition/.
2. Berger, John. (1972, UK). Ways of Seeing.
3. Best, Stephen. (2006, United States). The Death of the Author: A Reconsideration. Literature and Philosophy Quarterly.
4. Bishop, Claire. (2017, United Kingdom). Radical Impact of Digital Humanities on Art. IJFMR.
5. Brâncuși, Constantin. (Early 20th Century, Romania). “The true artist does not theorize about art, but instead creates relationships through their work.”
6. Bullot, Nicolas, & Reber, Rolf. (2013, Switzerland). The Psychohistorical Framework of Art Appreciation. Front. Hum. Neurosci.
7. Burstein, Joel. (1990, United States). Minimalism and the Distillation of Complex Concepts. Art & Design Magazine.
8. Calle, Sophie. (Late 20th Century, France). “The relationships between objects and people can often reveal more than the objects or people themselves.”
9. Chagall, Marc. (Mid 20th Century, Belarus/France). “Theories in art are often reflections of the artist’s own mind rather than the work itself, which is born from the heart.”
10. Cook, Simon. (2001, United Kingdom). The Mediated Manufacture of an ‘Avant-Garde’. The Sociological Review.
11. Crouch, Christopher. (2000, Australia). Negotiating Cross-cultural Education in the Visual Arts. Journal of Art & Design Education.
12. Danto, Arthur. (1964, United States). “The Artworld.” The Journal of Philosophy 61, no. 19.
13. Dixon, John, et al. (2012, United Kingdom). Of Human Birds and Living Rocks. Dialogues in Human Geography.
14. Dodd, Julian. (2017, United Kingdom). Ludwig Wittgenstein and the Complexity of Language. Philosophical Investigations.
15. Eliasson, Olafur. (21st Century, Denmark). “In art, the theory is not just an intellectual exercise but a deep connection to the world around us.”
16. Fuente, Alejandro. (2010, Spain). In Defence of Theoretical and Methodological Pluralism in the Sociology of Art. Cultural Sociology.
17. Gall, David. (2019, United States). Ethnocentrism and Higher Art Education: Lingering Legacies, Imperative Nondualities. Int J Art Design Ed.
18. Graves, Michael. (2002, United States). The Role of Aesthetics in the Institutional Theory of Art. J Aesth Art Crit.
19. Grauer, Victor. (1996, France). Toward a Unified Theory of the Arts. MTO.
20. Haworth, Mary. (2018, United States). The Role of Personal Writing Systems in Contemporary Art. Contemporary Art Review.
21. Ho, Lillian. (2022, United Kingdom). Rosalind Krauss and the Expansion of Postmodern Critique. Art Journal.
22. Jusslin, Henrik, et al. (2022, Finland). Post-approaches to education and the arts: Putting theories to work in arts educational practices. JASED.
23. Kandinsky, Wassily. (Early 20th Century, Russia). Concerning the Spiritual in Art.
24. Klee, Paul. (Early 20th Century, Switzerland). Creative Credo.
25. Messham-Muir, Kit, & Cvoro, Uros. (2020, Australia). Affect and Trauma in Contemporary Art Theory. Journal of Trauma Studies.
26. Rauschenberg, Robert. (Late 20th Century, USA). “Theories are tools; art is an act of discovery.”
27. Riley, Bridget. (Late 20th Century, UK). “The relationship between the artist and the viewer is a dynamic, changing one, dependent on the work of art itself.”
28. Rijmen, Frans, et al. (2002, Belgium). The Relationship Between Ideas and Manifestations in Conceptual Art. Art Theory Quarterly.
29. Rodin, Auguste. (Late 19th Century, France). “I invent nothing, I rediscover. Seeing connections where others have not.”
30. Rousell, David. (2019, Australia). Inhuman Forms of Life: On Art as a Problem for Post-Qualitative Research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education.
31. Terranova, Ann. (2014, United States). Systems Esthetics and Automatisms in Art. Art Theory Journal.
32. Wadle, Emma. (2023, United Kingdom). Zaha Hadid: Architecture and the Disruption of Form. Architectural Review.
33. Wilson, Adam Daley. (2024, United States). This is Post-Theory Art. (Research essay in preparation for conceptual art show, Engage Projects Gallery Chicago, pending 2025.)
34. Zeki, Semir. (2013, United Kingdom). Clive Bell’s “Significant Form” and the Neurobiology of Aesthetics. Front. Hum. Neurosci.