Abstract

There has been little serious philosophical reflection on whether, and in virtue of satisfying what conditions, ‘Outsider Art’ is art, as is standardly assumed. I critically examine a number of responses to this question implicit in curatorial practice and the critical literature. I argue that none of these responses carries conviction, and propose, on the basis of broader considerations in the philosophy of art, that the arthood of ‘Outsider’ pieces must be settled by reference to their individual provenance. This supports a parallel approach to questions about the artistic status of ‘primitive’, ‘tribal’, and more generally non-Western visual art. CiteULike     Connotea     Del.icio.us     What's this?