British Journal of Aesthetics, Vol.

36, No 4, October igg6

ARTISTRY
John Armstrong

Downloaded from http://bjaesthetics.oxfordjournals.org/ at Columbia University Libraries on January 25, 2012

I
PAINTERS HAVE always been praised for their ability to render likenesses and for
their technical accomplishments. But it is clear that, on its own, the ability to
render a likeness or to have superb control over the medium and instruments of
painting is not a sufficient condition for the creation of an artistically valuable
picture. Of course, this point does not sanction the view that technical
accomplishment is irrelevant to the creation of works of high artistic value. It is
still possible that what we value in a painting, when we value it as a work of art,
may be described with reference to technical accomplishment.
The opening sections of this paper are concerned with specifying what it is for
a painter to exercise artistry. On the basis of this understanding we can then go on
to enquire about the relevance of this exercise, on the part of the painter, to the
artistic merit of the painting.
In what follows I try to reconstruct some important ideas which may go under
the banner of'artistry'; it is not my aim to do justice to every legitimate use of the
word.

II
'Artistry' has application outside the realm of fine art. We may talk of the artistry
of a batsman or of a silversmith. What are we getting at with such talk? Making a
silver teapot is a skilled undertaking: certain techniques of handling the material
have to be mastered. That the silversmith Paul de Lamerie possessed such skills
to a high degree is evident from a teapot he made in 173s, now in the Ashmolean.
It is in the nature of a skill that the application of the skill can be controlled by the
master. In making this teapot, de Lamerie was particularly inventive and
imaginative in the uses to which he put his skill. There is a fine balance between
the decorative work on the spout, handle and lid and the restraint of the main
body. The spout has an elegant double curve which has been emphasized by a
linear decoration. There is a complex harmony between the form of the spout
and the form of the handle; the flattening of the bowl is repeated (in an
exaggerated way) in the lozenge form of the knop of the lid. And what we value
© Oxford University Press 1996 381
382 ARTISTRY

is not just that there is balance or harmony between these parts, but the particular
balance or harmony which has been achieved in this piece of work.
We can easily imagine another craftsman who possessed the relevant skills to
make just such a teapot but who did not have the imagination to undertake it,
who would not have thought of introducing a flowing motif where the spout
meets the bowl, or who would not have thought of pursuing a precise balance
between the final curve of the spout and the finger-rest on the handle, although
had this imaginary silversmith conceived of the pot in this way he would have

Downloaded from http://bjaesthetics.oxfordjournals.org/ at Columbia University Libraries on January 25, 2012

been able to realize the conception. The second craftsman lacked de Lamene's
artistry, although they were equal in skill. In this sense, 'artistry' is employed to
signal the imaginative use of a skill.
The notion of a skilfully realized imaginative conception is still too broad to
capture what we are getting at with the term 'artistry'. Suppose a clock-maker has
a brilliantly imaginative conception of a new kind of escape mechanism, which
requires some very technically complex metalwork. In making such a piece, the
clock-maker has skilfully realized an imaginative conception. But, the clock-
maker has not exercised artistry in the sense that we are concerned with here.
What is the difference between the skilful and imaginative clock-maker and
de Lamerie?
The teapot is intended to be valued in respect of its function, but the skill and
imagination which have gone into its making endow it not only with utility but
with features for which it can be valued in addition to its utility. The imaginative
exercise of skill which we are here concerned with is one which renders the
object valuable from an aesthetic point of view. The clock-maker did not endow
the clock with aesthetic qualities. This reference to aesthetic qualities is implicit
also in the use of'artistry' to describe the batsman's play.
Artistry, then, is to be understood as the skilful realization of an imaginative
conception which endows the object with aesthetic interest.
From this account of artistry, it is apparent that artistry will come by degrees.
For the terms in which it has been analysed, imagination and skill, each allow of
exercise to differing degrees. And the degree of artistry exercised will be a
function of the degree of imagination and skill. There is not an absolute sense in
which some painter may be said simply to possess or to lack artistry.

Ill
Artistry has been differentiated from uninspired technical mastery, and it can also
be differentiated from the exercise of imagination which is not accompanied by
adequate technical facility.
We can imagine a cultivated amateur who can direct a craftsman in the making
of a teapot like de Lamene's. The amateur can suggest the pursuit of such refined
features and can judge whether or not such qualities have been realized as the
 JOHN ARMSTRONG 383

work progresses. But the amateur does not himself have the skill to make a pot of
this quality. This amateur does not have the artistry of de Lamerie, although the
two are equals in respect of imagination.
It has sometimes been claimed that such scenarios, as that of the inspired
amateur, are incoherent. 'The "means" went into the idea, which could not have
been the same without them', writes Isenberg1 — meaning that unless one
possessed a particular degree of technical skill, one simply could not conceive of
the imaginative project in question. But this objection is not, in general, a forceful

Downloaded from http://bjaesthetics.oxfordjournals.org/ at Columbia University Libraries on January 25, 2012

one.
There are a variety of ways in which an imaginative project, such as that which
de Lamerie undertook with respect to the teapot, can be described. Each
description has a different dependence upon the material practice and each is
more or less complete as a description of the imaginative project of the artist. The
mere thinking about balance, which is a true but minimal description of the
imaginative project, does not seem to require any connection with the material of
silver. When so described, the amateur and the silversmith may be equally
imaginative and inspired.
However, there is a description of the silversmith's imaginative project which
is more detailed. It may involve thoughts about how a joint can be both elegant
and strong. This imaginative effort requires a degree of acquaintance with the
process of production. Only someone with detailed knowledge of how teapots are
made could conceive of the imaginative project so described, although in this case
it is still not required that the person be themselves able to realize the project.2
At a yet more detailed level of description, the silversmith's inspiration will
include all the nuances of how he actually carries out the project, the recognition
that the metal has to be worked in just such and such a way to achieve the
required effect. At this level of description, only someone who is an accomplished
silversmith can have such inspiration, or be said to be in possession of such an
imaginative project. As it is more and more fully described, the silversmith's
imaginative project is more and more bound up with the detail of execution.
With this proviso about the level of description of the imaginative effort, we
can continue to analyse the notion of artistry as a composite of two distinct
capacities: the capacity to conceive imaginatively a project and the capacity to
realize the project. This analysis is not vitiated by the fact that at a highly detailed
level of description the imaginative conception of the project will draw upon the
experience of realizing such projects. For there are perfectly coherent imaginative
conceptions of the project which do not exist at such a level of explicit detail.

IV
In order to understand further the use of the term 'artistry' in connection with
painting let us look at a particular example: the Tree Study (Louvre), sometimes
384 ARTISTRY

attributed to Claude and more recently to Poussin. Someone might praise this
work for the accuracy of its drawing: the artist manages to present a likeness of
the tree. Now, it is perfectly possible that someone be superbly good at drawing
likenesses of trees and yet never produce a work of stature. The ability to so
depict does not on its own explain the artist's ability to produce fine work. In one
sense, accurate depiction is an artistic sub-ability. If the painter had not been able
to depict accurately, he would not have been able to produce this tree study.
However, this ability (to produce an accurate depiction) on its own does not

Downloaded from http://bjaesthetics.oxfordjournals.org/ at Columbia University Libraries on January 25, 2012

explain how he was able to produce a fine as opposed to a mediocre tree study.
Suppose, further, it is suggested that the clean handling of the material (the ink
and the wash) is an ability the artist required for the production of this work.
Again, this is true and again it is not true that, on its own, this explains his ability
to produce a fine rather than an mediocre work.
A further ability which the artist exercises is that of balancing the demands of
accuracy of depiction and gracefulness of design so that he produces a beautiful (or
artistically valuable), accurate representation (an accurate representation which is
beautiful). This ability cannot be broken into two capacities: for accuracy of
depiction and for harmonious arrangement of the surface of the picture. This
two-step procedure would not reliably produce the outcome, and so we must
attribute to the artist another ability not reducible to the conjunction of those
two, namely the ability to make a beautifully disposed, accurate drawing of a tree.
For this, the ability to draw accurately is required, but not sufficient, just as the
ability to design the surface is necessary, but not sufficient. Although both are
necessary they are not jointly sufficient.
The feature which the picture has as a result of the successful exercise of this
capacity is that of being a well-disposed, accurate depiction. This precise feature
is one that can be valued intrinsically and irreplaceably. For no other feature could
be accurate and well-disposed in the same way and not, to that extent, look the
same as the work we are considering.
One central success of this picture is the way in which the marks on the paper
succeed in doing more than one thing at a time. Take, for example, the marks
which depict the bough on the right-hand side. Imagine the artist applying the
ink and wash. The marks produced achieves number of things at once. (1) They
form a graceful pattern themselves; (h)4hey cohere with the pattern of the whole;
(iii) they proceed from observations-resembling the characteristic curves of a
bough; (iv) they bound the right-hand side of the pictured space, effectively
containing the rich variety of the central tree and its foliage, not letting the eye
stray ofFthe edge of the paper; (v) they help create a planar perspective so that the
central tree seems firmly located in space at a definite distance from the
represented point of view; (vi) the lines succeed in terms of colour as well as
outline, and also in tone and in the density of the wash; (vii) they create the
impression of sunlight beyond; (viii) the lines look as if they have been applied
 JOHN ARMSTRONG 385

easily and lightly; (ix) the lines achieve all this while not detracting from the
central object depicted.
We can now be more specific about the artistry the painter has exercised. A
number of concerns which are potentially conflicting have been brought into
resolution, so that the work succeeds in a number of different ways
simultaneously.
The draughtsman has satisfied the criteria for the exercise of artistry already

Downloaded from http://bjaesthetics.oxfordjournals.org/ at Columbia University Libraries on January 25, 2012

elaborated in respect of the silversmith. But we can now say more about the
imaginative use of skill practised by the artist. Imagination is required specifically
to resolve, or make the most of, potentially conflicting concerns. An artist who
has the technical skill to make an accurate drawing or an attractive pattern may
not have the imagination required to achieve both of these simultaneously, and
certainly not to achieve them both simultaneously to a high degree. An amateur
who can suggest how such resolutions may be achieved could still lack the
technical ability to produce such a drawing.
We can now draw together an account of how the exercise of artistry is related
to the artistic merit3 of a work such as the Tree Study. In this case, the artistry that
is exhibited in the work is partly constitutive of its artistic merit. The picture's
exhibiting artistry comes to this: seeing it (correctly) as an intentionally produced
item, we see the work (correctly) as the result of the imaginative exercise of skill,
and our seeing it this way depends on the visible features of the work; we do not
merely know that the picture is the result of an exercise of artistry. But seeing
this, seeing various features of the work as imaginative and skilful, is (in this case)
a good reason for finding the picture intrinsically valuable, and intrinsically
valuable (partly) by virtue of its visual features. And this way of finding the work
valuable constitutes finding it artistically valuable.
The exhibited artistry, however, does not exhaust the reasons we have for
finding the picture valuable as a work of art The value we place upon sensitivity
to nature, for example, is relevant to the intrinsic value which we judge the
correct experience of the work to have. Thus the exercise of artistry is only
part-constitutive of the artistic merit of the study.
The exercise of artistry is relevant to the artistic merit of this work, but it does
not follow from this that it is either a necessary or a sufficient condition, on its
own, for artistic merit.

V
It is not always the case that a painter intends the spectator to value the work for
the artistry which went into it. The possibility of a divorce between the exercise
of artistry and the intention that the work is valued for the artistry which went
into its making is evident in cases outside the world of painting. In laying out a
garden, a gardener may skilfully realize an imaginative conception in which the
386 ARTISTRY

garden appears natural, and the lovely effects are intended to be regarded as happy
accidents
Raphael's portrait of Baldassare Castiglione (Louvre) has a direct and simple,
straightforward quality; it looks as if it was the easiest picture to paint. And it is
important to understanding the painting that we should see it as having this
quality. As a matter of fact Raphael exercised great artistry in the creation of this
work.4 It is arguable that one is not intended to value the work for the artistry.

Downloaded from http://bjaesthetics.oxfordjournals.org/ at Columbia University Libraries on January 25, 2012

One is intended to value the simplicity of the forms, not the effort that went into
achieving such a simplification.

VI
That great artistry went into the creation of the work, that it is intended to be
valued in part for that artistry, that it can be so valued—all this does not entail that
a work is of high artistic merit. Landseer's Dignity and Impudence (Tate Gallery)
shows Landseer to have possessed a high degree of artistry. His work is acutely
observant, the textures of the dogs' coats are skilfully rendered, the relations
between the animals in terms of colour and shape are carefully controlled; while
preserving a sense of the dogs as dogs he has given them a human emotional
aspect. All this makes it indisputable that Landseer exercised artistry in the
painting of this picture. But the work is rightly criticized for its sentimentalism.
The work invites the spectator to an experience which the spectator should not
place a high value upon.
One way of trying to understand what has gone wrong with the Landseer
picture (i.e. understanding why the exercise of considerable artistry does not
produce a work of high artistic merit) is via the claim that the subject matter upon
which artistry has been expended is open to severe criticism. But this is to assert
that projecting human emotions into animals is doomed from the start, from an
artistic point of view. And this is not something we are entitled to assert. It is,
rather, the particular way that Landseer has conceived of presenting the almost
human qualities of the animals which makes the work sentimental, not the mere
assertion that animals have quasi-human emotional qualities. There are pictures
in which dogs are depicted as dignified or as impudent which are not sentimental
pictures.
Bona fide artistry can be expended upon worthless or pernicious projects.
Among the most resonant words of criticism are 'very well done; not worth doing
in the first place'. One may execute a feeble or vile conception with great artistry;
it remains, all the same, a feeble or vile conception, and the very beguiling quality
of the artistry is lamentable, for it makes something trivial or base more attractive
than it deserves to be. Skill and imagination can serve trumpery wares just as
much as they can be necessary for the realization of a profound work.5
This point gives a way of responding to one of the established conundrums of
 JOHN ARMSTRONG 387

criticism. Some paintings were painted with repellent aims in mind, e.g.
propaganda pictures which propagandize for appalling causes. Now, it is perfectly
possible that such work should display a high degree of artistry (in the sense
spelled out in the preceding section). We can judge the artistry in abstraction from
the moral judgement about the ends to which it was put; but in evaluating the
work as a whole there is no reason why we should ignore its repellent purpose.
The work, taken as a whole, does not have a high intrinsic value, on the contrary
it has a large negative intrinsic value.

Downloaded from http://bjaesthetics.oxfordjournals.org/ at Columbia University Libraries on January 25, 2012

VII
The exercise of artistry (understood as the skilful realization of an imaginative
conception which endows the object with aesthetic interest) is not a sufficient
condition for the creation of a work of high artistic value. Whether the exercise of
artistry is necessary for the creation of a work of high artistic merit is another
question. But, short of pronouncing on its necessity, we can trace ways in which
the exercise of artistry is relevant to artistic merit in particular cases.

John Armstrong, 1 Estelle Road, London NW3 2JX, UK.

REFERENCES

1 2
Arnold Isenberg, 'The Technical Factor in Art',
in Aesthetics and Theory of Criticism ("Chicago
University of Chicago Press, 1973), p. 61 It is
not always precisely clear in this paper what
Isenberg is arguing for I attribute a strong
claim to him, but it may be that he is only
concerned to advance a weaker line such as the
following Without the existence of material
production, artists could not have had the
inspirations they have had This is true, but not
for the reasons Isenberg considers. "Was it
possible to conceive diffuse and subtle effects of
atmosphere until painters had begun to mix
their pigments with oil?' he asks. The implied
answer is 'no' But it is not clear why we should
return such an answer. By contrast, it is
obvious that a painter such as Claude could
only imagine painting the diffuse and subtle
effects of atmosphere because of the existence
of painting So, there is a way in which the
imaginative project depends upon the material
practice. The amateur can only imagine a
perfectly balanced handle and spout because
there are teapots
Someone who was once able to carry out the
project, but is now no longer able to (because
of, say, loss of precise motor control) is in a
different situation In conceiving of the
imaginative project they draw upon their
memory of being able to realize such projects.
3
To answer this question one would have to give
an adequate account of artistic merit, and this is
a task which cannot be pursued here. For the
purposes of this paper I construe artistic merit
as the intrinsic value of experiencing of the
work, when it is correctly experienced One
feature of correctly experiencing a work such as
the Tree Study is that one see it as irreplaceable
with respect to its visual features
A
That one is not intended to value the work for
the artistry which went into its creation does
not entail that one cannot be visually aware of
the artistry. One can dwell upon how carefully
Raphael has arranged the folds of the costume,
how the silhouette of Castiglione's hat is made
to complement many other curves in the
picture
5
In section II it was claimed that the endowing
388 ARTISTRY
of the object with aesthetic qualities is integral
to the exercise of artistry It may be thought
that this entails that no genuine exercise of
artistry could result in an object devoid of
artistic merit, a conclusion which contradicts
the claim made in the present section, namely
that the bona fide exercise of artistry may
produce a work of no artistic merit
The full resolution of this difficulty requires
a thorough exposition of the notion of artistic
merit, it lies outside the scope of this paper to
provide such an account. However, if artistic
merit is construed in the following way (as I
believe it should be) the apparent contradiction
disappears Artistic merit concerns the intrinsic
merit of the experience of contemplating the
work, when that experience is in line with the
experience the painter intended the spectator
to have It may be that the experience which
the painter intended the spectator to have is a
base one (This is obviously not to claim that
the painter conceived of it as base.) The
beguiling aesthetic qualities of the work may
only add to the corrupt character of the
Downloaded from http://bjaesthetics.oxfordjournals.org/ at Columbia University Libraries on January 25, 2012
intended experience In such a case, the
exercise of artistry has not endowed the work
with artistic merit.
I am grateful to Professor Malcolm Budd for
comments on an earlier version of this paper.