4 THE DEMANDS OF ART

will; only then can we first re-experience with our senses and then reconstruct intellec­
tually the specific creative method that had produced the given work-not to be confused
with the artist's own psychological experience of the creative act.
This way of stating our purpose requires a methodological clarification. Do we start
from the general historical conditions and deduce the work of art from them or, converse­
ly, do we first analyze the work of art and then link it with the general historical situation?
It might be argued in favor of the second approach that the work of art is the most direct
datum for the spectator and, when it comes to us from prehistoric times, is the principal
or only datum; that it is impossible to deduce the specificity of art (as distinct from other
creative domains) from general historical conditions; and, finally, that correlation be­
tween an individual work of art and the given historical situation must remain vague and
undemonstrated until the work of art itself has been grasped in all its specificity. On the
other hand it can be argued that without studying and taking into account the general
historical conditions and the creative methods prevalent in each epoch, analysis of the
work of art leads to a formalism that makes it impossible to link art to the history of ideas
-let alone political and economic history.1 The alternative is, however, a false one. It is
only by taking account of both aspects that we can arrive at a history of the methods and
problems of art. In this book we deal with one part of the task only-that of grasping the
work of art as a work of art. Thus we are obliged to take the work of art as our point
of departure. But this does not mean that we should isolate the artist's accomplishment
from its various contexts-those which helped to influence its creation (the individual,
social, and metaphysical contexts) or those toward which the artist himself deliberately
oriented his work.
Concerning external influences upon the artist the concluding essay will have a
number of things to say. As for the artist's own intentions, we may make the following
observation. If every activity of the human spirit involves three aims-to grasp and master
the material, to develop and test a method, and to transform the world in the light of
that mastery and that method-then this last aim must be particularly stressed in the
study of art. In saying all this I am aware of the limitations of the conceptual approach.
To begin with, we are dealing with an object that is not entirely accessible to our under­
standing (but this does not exempt us from the duty of mastering it intellectually as far
as we can) . Furthermore, conceptual analysis and reconstruction of the homogeneous
whole which is the work of art cannot replace direct experience of it. Only when a living
contact, however vague or unconscious, has been established with the work of art can
explanation be meaningful. For this reason the reader should first quietly contemplate

1. [The author elucidates his method of understanding Nlarx, Picasso: Trois it udes sur la sociologie de l'art; and
relations between historical conditions and works of art in his unpublished "Corot: Kunst unter dem Liberalis­
in Prehistoric Pottery and Civilization in Egypt; in Proudhon, mus-Monographie eines Bildes."]