How can one mistake an artwork for a real object? Asking how one can mistake Rauschenberg’s beds for real one, instead of artworks, is equivalent to asking what makes them artworks? The same question can be posed when discussing Warhol’s Brillo Boxes. If a certain theory makes a difference between a Brillo Box and a work of art containing one, then to Danto, Warhol’s piece is Art. But according to Tolstoy’s Three Conditions, which govern how infectious art will be, and the absence of any condition, would label Warhol’s Brillo Box as “Counterfeit Art”, therefore, in the end excluding the art from entering the artworld.
Danto claims that it is in terms of Reality Theory (RT) we must understand contemporary art. The theory itself tends to provide an example of how theory makes art possible. Postimpressionism would not be considered art with out the Reality Theory. Though it is true of some postimpressionistic artworks would not have been made if it were not for the development of certain ideas about the work itself. Perhaps ideas motivated by prior works of its time, which may or may not have had a clear theoretical basis earlier to the works existence. Danto is not talking about the being of these works, as a subject matter. He is talking about how works of art are well thought-out, and whether or not they should be considered into the artworld.
Danto’s first attempts at explaining the is of artistic identification seem to be examples where paintings are representational but it seems his example, "The white dab is Icarus", is meant to indicate that the is is not solely the is of representation. He presents an example in which the is of artistic identification is relied heavily upon in the viewing of two identical paintings, a white rectangle with a black line through the center. His comments indicate how use of the is of artistic identification is guided by theory, and understood in the simplest terms possible. At extreme, this theoretical support allows an abstractionist refusal to identify the black-lined rectangle with anything. An abstractionist and philistine can both state: "There is nothing there but white paint and a black line". The difference between their statements is the abstractionist is employing the is of artistic identification while the philistine is not.
“… Why the Brillo People cannot manufacture art, and why Warhol can’t but make artworks.”. Since it seem to be a concern of the academic artist that exact imitation must always fall short of the real thing, then why not use the real thing. Danto seems to support the Pop Artist in means of stressing how much effort is applied to reproduce machine-made objects by hand. “But the difference cannot consist in craft…” . In the end it takes a certain theory of art to tell the difference of work of art which contains a Brillo Box compared to the actual object itself. Danto intensifies his theory, (in a sense of is) telling his audience, without such a support the artwork would fall down into the object it actually is.
According to Tolstoy, in order for some to be a work of art it must be infectious. The more infectious the more unified we are through it. He claims there are three conditions that govern how infectious art will be. If the feeling is more individual, the deeper the emotions will draw out a surface response than those to a stereotype. In addition, Clarity of expression assists one who is being infected since the recipient will better understand more clearly, what is being transmitted. Last is sincerity that is the artist is working for themselves, not for others. Tolstoy argues sincerity, is the most important as it contains the other three. According to him, not all communication of emotion is considered art. Reasons being, there must be both an “external sign” or medium and a conscious, intentional manipulation of that medium. The intention is not to create a work of art, but to put out feeling using a medium. To do anything but would otherwise count as “Counterfeit Art”.
Danto claims any art is inducted into the artworld as long as it is supported by a theory. On the same note, Tolstoy says it is art as long as it follows the three conditions of what governs it as art. However, with the absence of any Condition the art will be excluded and condemned counterfeit. So this leaves us at a point of question: Where does Warhol stand in terms of his work? It is apparent Danto feels his work to have a plausible theory. So there…it is art! But, on the other hand, Tolstoy would disagree due to the fact Warhol his lacking one of his three conditions: Sincerity. So does this mean it is not art? According to Tolstoy and me, finding sincerity to be the most important factor in creating art is what allows your audience to “buy” into the emotion/ message that is being expressed. To imitate or use a replica of something that already had some sort of artistic value (just not displayed in an “art acceptable” environment) to begin with gives the mixed and impersonal messages about the artist. Since Warhol’s work is missing one of the three conditions, therefore is labeled as, “Counterfeit Art”.
In conclusion, it may have never occurred to the Brillo Company that their packaging would have been considered art, after a period of time passing, and the act of a Pop artist recreating the object as a hand-built structure. To remember the intention is not to create art, but to pass on feeling with a medium. If a certain theory makes a difference between a Brillo Box and a work of art containing one, then to Danto, Warhol’s piece is Art. Nevertheless, according to Tolstoy’s Three Conditions, which oversee how infectious art will be, and the absence of any condition, would label Warhol’s Brillo Box as “Counterfeit Art”, therefore, in the end excluding the art from entering the artworld.