Sontag

Though Sontag speaks and disagrees with the form of interpretation of art that can be invoked as a stereotype for art critics/interpreters in the modern world today, Aristotle's representational view of art battles that notion and challenges the view of, whether imitational art is a art form in itself, or just simply the product of the egos that critics possess in hopes of polishing their appearances as an connoisseur of finding the latent contents in artworks. In “Against Interpretation” Sontag discusses of the manner that our present world interprets artworks through a metaphorical sense. For from “the culture of late classical antiquity”(3) there have been texts that weren't meant to be read literally and thus have been given the interpretation
Yet, Aristotle may object to this with that though the critic/artist may have attached the allegorical meaning towards the artwork that may wish upon the complete opposite of that, it is not the duty of the artist to replicate but rather create something more than the reality given. For though the concert band may have played the “Four Seasons” different from Vivaldi's original piece, it isn't in the “flawed” performance that represents the true meaning of art. Rather, it is through the concert bands ability to not only please the audience in the aesthetic sense but also bring a companion-like piece that not only diversifies the artwork itself but the range of interpretation from critics. Sontag objection towards this however, could follow that our task as critics does not revolve around finding the untapped potential of contents that are in a work of art but rather to cut back in content so that we are capable of seeing what it is as a whole. For our commentary on art should only revolve around the subject of what it is and how it is what it
For though critics may evaluate their work on the basis of their personal favorings towards certain elements of an piece, this would indeed create an addition of idea of reality/meaning that is rather biased to the artist itself. By this account then, it is important to differentiate then the biases that are considered good in Aristotle's account as they are capable of producing a pleasurable aesthetic sense towards the audience rather than the bad in which they not only deviate from the artists true intention but also that they may completely destroy the original representation of the artists and bring it towards to an more ominous setting in which they provide no aesthetics or emotions that are helpful towards the development for the better of the audience. So it is important to find the grey area in both Sontag and Aristotle's arguments in that the true form in evaluating art and imitational art lies not in the method of the critic and art, but rather the content of the art itself. Furthermore, this is not to say that Sontag's belief in a world where metaphorical interpretation is destroyed and the placement of only criticism that are based on transparence is the true method of critiquing and performing art, but should be valued on its own individuality of whether it is capable of brining aesthetic pleasure to its audience and its ability