This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
What I will aim for in answering the title question is extensional adequacy, that is, I will try to formulate an account that captures as much of the extension as possible of what we ordinarily think counts as a portrait. Two philosophers have recently and independently from one another embarked on the same project. Cynthia Freeland’s theory of portraiture, as it is developed in her book, Portraits and Persons, is discussed in Sections 1 and 2 of this paper. Sections 3 and 4 offer a critical exploration of Paolo Spinicci’s phenomenological study of portraiture. Finally, in Sections 5 and 6, I present an alternative account of portraiture, one that will hopefully address all the objections raised against the two competing theories.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hans R.V. Maes (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: