Vagueness and the Ontology of Art

Abstract

Vagueness and the ontology of art are both thorny issues. Although a lot of original work has been conducted in the XXth century in the domain of the ontology of art, trying to clarify, the nature of a work of art, its conditions of identity and individuation, and the status of aesthetic properties, there has also been some suspicion about the relevance of such ontological reflexions which seem to take us too far away from aesthetic experiences, artistic practices and the works themselves. As far as vagueness is concerned, it is often viewed as a mere epistemic or semantic notion, and the claim that there might be vague objects, namely ontic vagueness, is very seldom taken as a serious option1 .However, if the apparent lack of boundaries, whatever its sources, is characteristic of vagueness, art would seem to be, prima facie, one of the domains that might be most hospitable to it. But if there are strong reasons against making sense of ontic vagueness, our prima facie intuitions may be just as hard to sustain here as anywhere else. Is there a way to avoid such conclusions? To view vagueness not only as an objective property but even as an irreducible constituent of reality, and as such, of the ontology of art itself? Following some original insights offered by Ch.S. Peirce, at the turn of the century, on the semiotic, epistemology and ontology of vagueness, I shall suggest that there is such a way, and that it may even help to favor some form of realism of vagueness in art.