Understanding artworks from Danto’s philosophy of art: a Peircean semiotic approach

2.1 Arthur Danto’s philosophy of art: artworld

Arthur Danto’s philosophy of art offers a distinct perspective on the nature and interpretation of artworks. Danto challenges traditional approaches to defining art by proposing that art is not solely based on aesthetic or formal properties. Instead, he emphasizes the importance of the artworld – a complex network of institutions, theories, practices, and historical contexts – in shaping the definition and interpretation of artworks (Danto 1964: 571–584).

According to Danto, artworks derive their meaning and significance from their position within the artworld. He argues that the artworld provides a conceptual framework that imbues artworks with cultural, historical, and contextual relevance. The artworld serves as a platform where artworks are situated and evaluated, influencing their interpretation and value (Danto 1964: 571–584).

For Danto, art extends beyond a mere visual or sensory experience. It becomes a philosophical inquiry into the nature of representation and the cultural context that gives artworks their value. He suggests that what distinguishes an object as an artwork is not its intrinsic physical properties, but rather its placement within the artworld and its relationship to the broader artistic discourse (Danto 1981: 136). In other words, it is the conceptual context and the interplay between the artwork, the artworld, and the broader cultural context that shape its meaning and significance.

Danto’s philosophy of art shifts the focus from the artwork itself to the conceptual framework within which it exists. By emphasizing the role of the artworld in shaping the understanding and interpretation of artworks, Danto provides a unique perspective that highlights the sociocultural, historical, and philosophical dimensions of artistic creations.

Furthermore, Danto introduces the concept of the “end of art,” suggesting that with the advent of conceptual art in the 20th century, traditional aesthetic criteria and notions of progress in art have become obsolete. According to Danto, art has reached a point where it can no longer be defined by its material or formal qualities alone. Instead, the significance of an artwork lies in its ability to embody and convey philosophical ideas and engage in conceptual inquiries (Danto 1984: 387–394). This shift in the understanding of art challenges conventional notions of artistic production and reception.

Danto’s philosophy of art has profound implications for the interpretation and evaluation of artworks. It calls for a critical engagement with the conceptual content and contextual frameworks of artworks rather than a reliance on formal or aesthetic qualities. Danto states: “It is no longer possible to look at something and say whether or not it is art by virtue of what it looks like” (Danto 1986: 4). By shifting the focus to the artworld and the ideas expressed through artworks, Danto invites viewers to explore the philosophical dimensions of art and the intellectual challenges it presents.

2.2 Charles Sanders Peirce’s semiotics: signs with a triadic model

Peirce’s semiotic framework provides a robust foundation for analyzing signs and symbols, paving the way for a comprehensive understanding of artistic expressions. To grasp the essence of Peirce’s semiotics, it is crucial to delve into its key concepts and their implications for the analysis of artworks.

At the core of Peirce’s semiotics is the notion of the sign. Peirce conceived that “signs are entities that mediate between an object (the signified) and a representation of that object (the signifier)” (Peirce 1903: 228). This triadic relationship forms the basis of his semiotic framework, emphasizing the interplay between the sign, its referent, and the interpretant – the mental process or understanding generated by the sign.

Peirce classified signs into three categories: iconic, indexical, and symbolic. Iconic signs bear a resemblance or similarity to their referents. They convey meaning through resemblance, such as a portrait capturing the likeness of a person or a painting depicting a recognizable object. Indexical signs establish a factual or causal connection with their referents. They function as indicators or traces of the object they represent. For instance, smoke is an indexical sign of fire, and footprints are indexical signs of someone’s presence. Symbolic signs, on the other hand, “rely on conventional or agreed-upon meanings attributed to them within a cultural or social context” (Peirce 1903: 245). Words, mathematical symbols, and most abstract artworks fall into this category. Symbolic signs derive their meaning from social conventions and shared understandings.

By applying Peirce’s semiotics to the analysis of artworks, we gain insights into their underlying sign systems and the layers of meaning they embody. For example, an iconic representation in art may “evoke emotions or provoke associations based on visual resemblance” (Peirce 1903: 228). The depiction of a red rose in a painting can elicit feelings of love or symbolize beauty due to its iconic connection with these concepts. Indexical signs in art can establish connections between the artwork and its sociohistorical context. A photograph capturing a specific moment in history serves as an indexical sign, providing evidence of a particular event or era. Symbolic signs in art rely on shared cultural codes and interpretations. For instance, religious symbols like the cross or the crescent moon hold symbolic significance within their respective faiths, carrying a multitude of connotations and interpretations.

Peirce’s semiotic framework also highlights the importance of the interpretant – the understanding or meaning generated by the sign. This aspect is particularly relevant in the context of art interpretation. Artworks often evoke diverse interpretations based on individual experiences, cultural backgrounds, and personal perspectives. Peirce’s semiotics encourages us to explore these interpretations and engage with the multifaceted nature of artistic expression.

Peirce’s semiotic framework provides a systematic approach to understanding signs and symbols within artworks. By categorizing signs into iconic, indexical, and symbolic, we can unravel the layers of meaning embedded within artistic expressions (Peirce 1903). This understanding enhances our ability to analyze artworks, appreciate their significance, and engage in meaningful interpretations. The application of Peirce’s semiotics to art analysis paves the way for a deeper exploration of the intricate relationship between signs, symbols, and the rich tapestry of artistic expression.

Integrating Danto’s philosophy of art with Peirce’s semiotics enhances our understanding of artistic expression. While Peirce’s semiotics provides a framework for analyzing signs and symbols within artworks, Danto’s philosophy enriches the interpretive process by emphasizing the contextual and conceptual aspects of art. Danto’s concept of the artworld sheds light on the sociocultural context that shapes the interpretation and significance of artworks (Danto 1997), while Peirce’s semiotics provides a systematic approach to deciphering the signs and symbols within them. This combination allows a deeper exploration of the intricate relationship between signs, symbols, and the philosophical and cultural dimensions of artistic interpretation.

3.1 Leonardo da Vinci’s Mona Lisa

The Mona Lisa, painted by Leonardo da Vinci in the early 16th century, is a masterpiece that holds immense semiotic significance. As a semiotic object, this classic painting functions as a sign that communicates meaning through its various elements and interactions with viewers. It embodies iconic, indexical, and symbolic qualities that engage in a complex web of signification.

Firstly, the painting’s iconicity lies in its realistic representation of the subject, particularly the enigmatic smile and captivating gaze of the woman believed to be Lisa Gherardini. These visual characteristics evoke recognition and familiarity, establishing an iconic relationship between the artwork and its subject. As Nelson Goodman also suggests, “Pictorial representation is a mode of signification” (Goodman 1976: 3). “In this sense, the Mona Lisa is a real icon of art; it is an icon in its pictorial description as well as in its represented meaning”. The realistic portrayal of her face, the subtle smile, and the intricate details contribute to its iconic quality. The viewer recognizes the physical resemblance and interprets the painting based on the associations and emotions evoked by the iconic representation.

Danto argues that art functions as an index, but not in the same way as a straightforward indicator like an arrow, as he states “art is an index, of course, but an index of artistic intentions and achievements, rather than the sort of thing an arrow is an index of” (Danto 1981: 65). In the case of the Mona Lisa, it serves as an index of artistic intentions and achievements rather than a literal representation. The painting’s significance lies not only in its visual resemblance to the subject, Lisa Gherardini, but also in the artistic choices and achievements manifested within it.

According to Danto, the Mona Lisa’s iconic status is not solely dependent on its visual resemblance, but rather on the artistic intentions and achievements it represents. Da Vinci’s deliberate choices in composition, technique, and expression contribute to the painting’s iconic power. The enigmatic smile, for example, invites speculation and arouses curiosity, engaging the viewer on a deeper level. It is through these artistic choices that the Mona Lisa becomes more than a mere portrait – it becomes a vehicle for conveying meaning and inviting interpretation.

Furthermore, Danto’s concept of the artworld and the historical context in which the Mona Lisa exists play a crucial role in its semiotic analysis. The painting’s fame, historical significance, and the discourse surrounding it contribute to its iconic status. The artworld’s recognition of the Mona Lisa as a masterpiece adds layers of interpretation and meaning to the artwork. It becomes a symbol not only of the subject but also of da Vinci’s artistic genius and the cultural legacy associated with it.

Thus, the Mona Lisa functions as both an index of artistic intentions and achievements and an iconic representation. The painting’s visual resemblance to the subject, combined with da Vinci’s artistic choices and the historical context, contributes to its iconic status and invites multiple layers of interpretation. This specific artwork transcends mere representation, becoming a symbol that evokes associations, emotions, and contemplation in the viewer, making it a compelling subject for semiotic analysis.

Secondly, the Mona Lisa possesses indexical qualities. According to Danto, “The indexical qualities of the Mona Lisa extend beyond its representational resemblance. It indexes the technical skill and cultural context of Leonardo da Vinci’s artistic production” (Danto 1981: 71). Da Vinci’s mastery of artistic techniques is evident in the brushstrokes, the play of light and shadow, and the meticulous attention to detail present in the artwork.

The brushstrokes in this painting demonstrate da Vinci’s ability to create subtle transitions and capture the texture of the subject’s skin. Through controlled and precise brushwork, he achieved a sense of depth and dimensionality, enhancing the naturalistic representation of the figure. The skilled use of chiaroscuro, the contrast between light and dark, further emphasizes the three-dimensionality of the painting and contributes to its realistic appearance. These technical aspects of the artwork serve as indexical signs of da Vinci’s artistic prowess and his ability to manipulate the medium to achieve his vision.

What’s more, the Mona Lisa’s indexical qualities extend to the cultural context of the Renaissance. During this period, there was a strong emphasis on humanism, scientific exploration, and the revival of classical ideals. The artwork’s attention to capturing the human form with accuracy and sensitivity reflects the Renaissance’s fascination with the human figure and the study of anatomy. Da Vinci’s exploration of facial expression, particularly the subject’s enigmatic smile, showcases his engagement with portraying the complexity of human emotions. These features of the painting index the cultural context in which it was created and reflect the artistic values and intellectual pursuits of the Renaissance era.

By considering the indexical qualities of the Mona Lisa, we gain insight into both da Vinci’s artistic skill and the historical context of the artwork. It goes beyond being a mere representation of the subject and becomes a testament to da Vinci’s technical mastery and the cultural milieu in which he was working.

Last but not the least, in a symbolic sense, this artwork carries multiple interpretations. As Peirce suggests: “The symbolic significance of the Mona Lisa is profound, as it elicits contemplation on the mysteries of human existence” (Peirce 1931: 355). Roland Barthes further emphasizes, “the Mona Lisa’s symbolic power lies in its ability to provoke and engage viewers in philosophical and emotional contemplation” (Barthes 1972: 39). It has become a symbol of beauty, mystery, and enigma. The enigmatic smile and the Mona Lisa’s gaze captivate viewers, inviting speculation and prompting contemplation about the nature of the human condition. The symbolic significance of it extends beyond its visual appearance, engaging appreciators in profound contemplation and empathy.

From Danto’s perspective, the Mona Lisa’s symbolic power lies in its ability to transcend the mere representation of a specific individual and evoke broader philosophical contemplation. Danto argues that art acquires meaning through its historical and cultural context, as well as its reception within the artworld. In this regard, its symbolic significance is shaped by its historical status as an iconic artwork and its reception within the artworld.

The enigmatic smile and captivating gaze of the Mona Lisa contribute to its symbolic allure. According to Danto, the enigma of the smile becomes an aesthetic mystery that engages the viewer’s interpretation. The ambiguity and intrigue surrounding the Mona Lisa’s expression invite speculation and prompt contemplation about the complexities of the human condition. The painting becomes a vehicle through which viewers can reflect on the elusive nature of identity, the enigmatic qualities of human emotions, and the mysteries that lie within individuals.

Danto would argue that the symbolic significance of the Mona Lisa extends beyond its visual appearance. It becomes a reflection of the philosophical and emotional inquiries that art can provoke. The artwork’s ability to elicit contemplation on the mysteries of human existence aligns with Danto’s belief that art has the power to transcend the ordinary and engage viewers in profound ways.

The Mona Lisa’s symbolic significance arises from its historical context, reception within the artworld, and its ability to engage viewers in philosophical and emotional contemplation. While Danto’s primary focus may be on the institutional and contextual aspects of art, his philosophy acknowledges the transformative power of art and its capacity to inspire profound reflection on the mysteries of human existence.

Through its interplay of iconic, indexical, and symbolic qualities, the Mona Lisa engages viewers in a semiotic discourse, transcending its material form to become a timeless and enigmatic symbol of beauty, mystery, and profound artistic expression.

3.2 Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain

Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain is a groundbreaking artwork that defied conventional notions of art and challenged the very concept of artistic creation. Created in 1917, Fountain consisted of a urinal presented as an artwork, pushing the boundaries of what could be considered art. Duchamp’s act of recontextualizing an everyday object as an artwork provoked controversy and sparked debates about the nature of art, authorship, and the role of the artist. With its provocative gesture and rejection of traditional aesthetics, Fountain became an influential symbol of the Dada movement and a catalyst for redefining the boundaries of artistic expression.

Regarded as Duchamp’s masterpiece, Fountain challenges traditional notions of art and also invites a semiotic analysis of its symbolic meaning. As Danto asserts, “To see something as art requires something the eye cannot descry – an atmosphere of artistic theory, a knowledge of the history of art” (Danto 1981: 73). It astonishingly consists of a urinal, signed with the pseudonym “R. Mutt” and presented as an artwork. This readymade object subverts conventional expectations of art and raises questions about the nature of artistic creation.

According to Danto, Fountain’s significance lies in its context within the artworld and the concepts it challenges. Duchamp’s act of selecting and presenting the urinal as art elevates it to the realm of artistic discourse. The artwork’s placement in a gallery or exhibition space transforms it into an object of contemplation and discussion. Danto argues that it is this transformative act, rather than any inherent aesthetic qualities, that grants Fountain its status as art.

Furthermore, Fountain’s semiotic meaning is derived from its symbolic connotations. Duchamp’s choice of a urinal as the readymade object carries associations with bodily functions, human identity, and societal conventions. By presenting such an object in the realm of art, Duchamp raises questions about what can be considered art, challenging the traditional boundaries and definitions. The act of choosing a urinal as an artwork highlights the subjective nature of artistic interpretation and invites viewers to critically engage with their preconceived notions of art.

Danto’s theories on the artworld and the nature of art shed light on the significance of Fountain as an artwork. By placing emphasis on the conceptual framework surrounding the piece and the act of artistic selection, Danto argues that art is not solely determined by visual appeal or craftsmanship. Instead, it is the context, intention, and the artistic theory behind an object that define its artistic status.

As an iconic artwork, Fountain challenges conventional notions of art and invites a semiotic analysis of its symbolic meaning. Danto’s viewpoint emphasizes the importance of context, artistic theory, and the transformative act of selection in defining something as art. Fountain as the presentation of a urinal as an artwork disrupts traditional expectations and prompts viewers to question the nature and boundaries of artistic creation. From his viewpoint, we gain a deeper understanding of the conceptual significance and artistic discourse surrounding Fountain.

Symbolically, Fountain is rich with meaning. As Peirce suggests, “Symbols have a more general and more varying significance than do indices” (Peirce 1931: 355). It provokes contemplation about the concept of authorship, the role of the artist, and the institutional framework of the artworld. Duchamp’s act of presenting a urinal as an artwork challenges the traditional criteria for what can be considered art and forces viewers to reevaluate their preconceptions. Fountain symbolizes a radical departure from aesthetic concerns, highlighting the conceptual and intellectual dimensions of art. Barthes once wrote, “Fountain destabilizes the very notion of art, blurring the boundaries between everyday objects and artistic creations” (Barthes 1972: 52).

According to Danto, the meaning of art lies in its historical and institutional context rather than relying solely on aesthetic or formal qualities. In the case of Fountain, the symbolic significance arises from its challenge to traditional notions of art and the reevaluation of artistic criteria. Danto argues that art can be defined by the presence of an artistic theory or framework that confers meaning onto an object.

Fountain, as a readymade object, symbolizes a radical departure from aesthetic concerns and highlights the conceptual and intellectual dimensions of art. Duchamp’s act of presenting a urinal as an artwork forces viewers to confront their preconceived notions about art and question the role of the artist and the criteria for artistic creation. It disrupts the traditional understanding of artistic production, blurring the boundaries between everyday objects and artistic creations.

From Danto’s viewpoint, Fountain represents a pivotal moment in the history of art, where the focus shifts from aesthetic judgments to the conceptual framework surrounding an artwork. It challenges the notion of authorship and emphasizes the importance of the artworld and its institutions in determining what can be considered art. The symbolic significance of this artwork lies in its ability to provoke contemplation about the nature of art itself, the role of the artist, and the institutional framework that defines and confers meaning upon artworks.

The symbolic importance of Fountain lies in its defiance of conventional art paradigms and the reassessment of artistic standards. It represents a shift away from aesthetic considerations, emphasizing the conceptual and intellectual aspects of art. Duchamp’s decision to exhibit a urinal as a work of art compels spectators to challenge their established beliefs, fostering reflection on art’s essence, the artist’s function, and the institutional system that shapes and bestows significance upon artistic creations.

Additionally, Fountain can be seen as an indexical sign of the historical and cultural context in which it was created. Duchamp’s work emerged during the early 20th century, a period marked by avant-garde movements and a questioning of traditional artistic norms. The presentation of a urinal as an artwork was a provocative statement that challenged the established conventions of the artworld, thus serving as an indexical sign of the cultural and artistic climate of the time. As Hal Foster states, “Fountain can be understood as a critical gesture that disrupts the prevailing artistic discourse and prompts a reexamination of the underlying assumptions of artistic production and reception” (Foster 1996: 108).

From Danto’s viewpoint, Fountain can be seen as an indexical sign that reflects the historical and cultural context in which it emerged. Danto emphasizes that art gains its meaning through the historical circumstances and the artworld’s reception of the artwork. In the early 20th century, avant-garde movements and a questioning of traditional artistic norms were prevalent. Duchamp’s presentation of a urinal as an artwork was a provocative and disruptive act that challenged the established conventions of the artworld.

Danto argues that Fountain serves as an indexical sign of the cultural and artistic climate of the time. It symbolizes a critical gesture that disrupts the prevailing artistic discourse and prompts a reexamination of the underlying assumptions of artistic production and reception. By selecting an everyday object and presenting it within the context of art, Duchamp challenges the notion of what can be considered art and questions the criteria by which artworks are evaluated.

From this perspective, Fountain’s indexical significance lies in its ability to embody the historical moment and the transformative potential of art. It becomes an indexical sign of the cultural shifts and the avant-garde movements that aimed to redefine artistic practices. Duchamp’s act of choosing a urinal as an artwork disrupts the established notions of taste, skill, and craftsmanship, prompting a reassessment of the underlying assumptions and criteria that define art.

Here, Fountain can be seen as an indexical sign that reflects the historical and cultural context in which it emerged. It symbolizes a critical gesture that disrupts the prevailing artistic discourse and prompts a reexamination of the underlying assumptions of artistic production and reception. Duchamp’s act challenges the established criteria for art, questioning the role of taste, skill, and craftsmanship. Fountain becomes an indexical sign of the transformative potential of art and the cultural shifts taking place in the early 20th century.

While Fountain may lack iconic qualities in the traditional sense, it does bear iconic qualities in terms of its influential status and its impact on the trajectory of art history. The artwork’s status as an icon lies in its ability to provoke discourse, spark debates, and redefine the boundaries of art, even decades after its creation.

Understood from Danto’s perspective, this postmodern artwork’s iconic significance arises from its transformative effect on the artworld and its enduring influence on subsequent artistic movements. The artwork’s provocative nature and Duchamp’s act of presenting a urinal as an artwork challenged the established conventions of art, shifting the focus from aesthetic considerations to conceptual and intellectual dimensions.

Fountain’s iconic status is evident in its ability to generate ongoing discussions and debates within the art community. It continues to be studied, analyzed, and referenced as a pivotal moment in art history. Its impact extends beyond its physical form, as it serves as a catalyst for questioning the nature of art, the role of the artist, and the criteria for artistic evaluation.

Moreover, its iconic qualities can be observed in its lasting influence on subsequent generations of artists. Duchamp’s radical gesture opened new avenues for artistic expression and expanded the possibilities of what can be considered art. The artwork’s conceptual approach and its challenge to conventional norms continue to inspire contemporary artists, who seek to push the boundaries of artistic practice and engage in critical dialogue.

While Fountain may lack traditional iconic qualities, it holds an influential and iconic status within the realm of art history. Its ability to provoke discourse, spark debates, and redefine the boundaries of art make it an enduring symbol of artistic innovation. Fountain’s transformative impact on the artworld and its lasting influence on subsequent generations of artists contribute to its iconic qualities, showcasing its significance as a catalyst for rethinking the nature of art.

3.3 Andy Warhol’s Campbell’s Soup Cans

Andy Warhol’s Campbell’s Soup Cans stands as a quintessential example of postmodern artwork. This iconic series, created in the 1960s, challenged traditional notions of art and embraced the aesthetics of mass culture and consumerism. Through his repetitive and vibrant depictions of Campbell’s soup cans, the artist blurred the boundaries between high art and everyday objects, inviting viewers to question the distinction between art and commodity. With its bold statement and subversion of artistic conventions, Campbell’s Soup Cans became a symbol of the postmodern movement, reflecting the shifting cultural landscape and the emergence of new artistic paradigms.

This iconic artwork can also provide an intriguing case for semiotic analysis, shedding light on the intricate relationship between art, consumer culture, and societal values. As Jean Baudrillard asserts, “Warhol’s soup cans emerge as emblems of an entire commercialized culture, icons of contemporary society” (Baudrillard 1998: 123). This series of paintings features 32 individual canvases, each meticulously depicting a different flavor of Campbell’s soup can. The artwork gained prominence for its bold portrayal of everyday consumer objects and its reflection on mass production and consumer culture.

In terms of iconic qualities, Campbell’s Soup Cans evokes a sense of familiarity and recognition, encapsulating the essence of Roland Barthes’ concept of myth. According to Barthes, “Myths are signs, but they communicate by means of something more definite than language: they work with images” (Barthes 1957: 113). The repetition of the soup can image across the series establishes an iconic relationship between the artwork and the recognizable commercial product. The detailed representation of the soup cans, with their vibrant colors and precise labeling, invites viewers to reflect on the influence of popular culture and consumerism on art.

Danto holds that seeing something as art requires an atmosphere of artistic theory – a knowledge of the history of art (Danto 1964: 581). In the case of Warhol’s Campbell’s Soup Cans, the repetition of the soup can image across the series, combined with its display within the context of an art exhibition, invites viewers to engage with it as an artwork. By situating the soup cans in the realm of art, Warhol challenges conventional notions of artistic value and prompts a reevaluation of the boundaries of artistic practice.

The intricate representation of the soup cans reflects Warhol’s meticulous approach to the visual presentation of everyday objects. Danto states, “Art is the transfiguration of the commonplace, a decontextualization and recontextualization of what would otherwise be ordinary objects” (Danto 1964: 582). The transformation of the soup cans into artworks through their detailed representation and the intentional selection of colors and labeling elevates them to the status of art, prompting viewers to consider the relationship between popular culture, consumerism, and artistic expression.

Campbell’s Soup Cans exemplifies Danto’s concept of the artworld, where the context and presentation of an object within the art sphere endow it with aesthetic significance. The series challenges traditional notions of artistic value by highlighting the role of intention and context in determining what can be considered art. By incorporating everyday objects into the realm of art, Warhol prompts viewers to critically examine the relationship between art, mass production, and consumer culture.

Thus, these artworks possess iconic qualities that evoke familiarity and recognition, aligning with Danto’s perspective on the artworld. The series challenges conventional notions of artistic value, inviting viewers to engage with everyday objects as art. Through the repetition of the soup can image and the meticulous representation of details, Warhol prompts reflection on the influence of popular culture and consumerism on artistic expression.

Indexically, Campbell’s Soup Cans serves as a sign of the sociocultural context in which they were created – the rise of consumerism and the proliferation of mass-produced goods. As Frederic Jameson argues, “Warhol’s art functions as a form of symptomatic reading, decoding the cultural logic of late capitalism” (Jameson 1991: 54). The artwork indexes the era of the 1960s, capturing the spirit of the Pop Art movement and its critique of the commodification of everyday objects. It becomes an indexical sign of the economic and cultural transformations of the time, reflecting the changing landscape of postwar America.

Danto emphasizes that art is not just about the visual representation of objects but also about the ideas and meanings they convey within a particular cultural framework. This artwork, through their repetition and mass-produced aesthetic, become indexical signs of the rise of consumerism and the commodification of everyday objects. They capture the essence of the Pop Art movement, which aimed to challenge traditional artistic hierarchies and blur the boundaries between high and low culture.

Danto’s theory of the artworld suggests that the context in which an object is presented and understood as art is crucial to its artistic value. In the case of Campbell’s Soup Cans, the work’s display within the realm of art, such as in galleries or museums, transforms them from ordinary commercial products into artworks with aesthetic significance.

By indexing the cultural logic of late capitalism and critiquing the commodification of everyday objects, Campbell’s Soup Cans prompts viewers to question the relationship between art, consumerism, and the broader sociocultural context of the 1960s. They challenge the traditional notion of what can be considered art and invite a reevaluation of the boundaries and meanings of artistic practice.

Symbolically, these artworks convey deeper meanings, engaging in a discourse on art’s relationship to popular culture and challenging established hierarchies. Lucy Lippard articulates, “Warhol’s soup cans are a metaphor for art’s struggle with itself, its own definition and existence” (Lippard 1985: 89). They represent a commentary on the role of art and its relationship to popular culture. Warhol’s deliberate choice of a mundane object as the subject matter challenges traditional notions of what constitutes art and elevates the everyday to the realm of artistic significance. The repetitive nature of the series also symbolizes the repetitive and uniform nature of consumer culture, prompting viewers to reflect on the implications of mass production and the homogenization of societal experiences.

Campbell’s Soup Cans can be seen as symbolically challenging traditional definitions and expectations of art. Danto argues that art can be defined by its ability to provoke thought, raise questions, and engage in philosophical discourse. Warhol’s choice of the soup cans as subject matter signifies a departure from conventional artistic themes and materials, pushing the boundaries of what is considered art.

By selecting a mundane and mass-produced object, Warhol symbolically questions the hierarchy between high and low culture, granting the status of art to the everyday object. The repetition of the soup can imagery across the series further emphasizes the uniformity and repetition inherent in consumer culture, inviting viewers to reflect on the effects of mass production and the homogenization of experiences.

Lippard believes Campbell’s Soup Cans serve as a metaphor for art’s self-reflection and its struggle with defining its own existence. This aligns with Danto’s theory of art as a continuous process of reevaluating and redefining itself within the artworld’s changing context. The cans become a symbol of art’s ongoing dialogue with popular culture and its attempt to challenge and transcend traditional artistic boundaries.

Through its symbolic significance, this artwork encourages viewers to critically examine the relationship between art and popular culture, the role of mass production, and the broader sociocultural implications of consumerism. They prompt discussions about the nature of art, its definitions, and its capacity to provoke thought and reflection.

By applying Peirce’s semiotic framework to artworks such as the Mona Lisa, Fountain, and Campbell’s Soup Cans, we gain a deeper appreciation of their layers of meaning and their broader significance within the artworld. As Peirce eloquently states, “Signs mediate between an object and an interpreter, conveying meaning through a triadic relationship of the sign itself, its object, and its interpretant” (Peirce 1867: 213). Peirce’s semiotics allows us to explore the interplay between signs, symbols, and their interpretants, providing a systematic approach to the analysis and interpretation of artworks.

The integration of Peirce’s semiotics with Arthur Danto’s philosophy of art provides a comprehensive framework for analyzing and interpreting artworks, which enhances our understanding of the complexities of artistic expression. Danto’s emphasis on the artworld and the conceptual frameworks of art complements Peirce’s focus on signs and their meanings. Together, they offer a comprehensive lens through which we can unravel the intricate relationships between art, symbols, interpretation, and cultural contexts.