Post History

Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/29124
License name: CC BY-SA 3.0
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Apologies for what is a bit of a non-answer-answer. Because a great many conceptual-art-objects blatantly flaunt traditional definitions concerned with objects, properties, authorship, intent, and meaning, I think conceptual art hints at a better "art" definition.

The conceptual artist doesn't (necessarily) create an object or performance with the qualities of art objects or art performances--instead they design objects or performances to create _some experience_ (often an experience of considering, like "how inadequate my definition of art is"). But this doesn't just describe what conceptual artists do--it describes what all artists do.

Art isn't an object or performance; art is (a kind of) experience. Poetry isn't an arrangement of words following any set of rules--it's a kind of language experience (which differs from our everyday language experience).

(I'll stick my speculation on the effect of this reframing in comments)

Original score: 3