TED-Ed: Who decides what art means? - Hayley Levitt

The video explores the debate on artistic interpretation, focusing on whether an artist's intention should influence how their work is perceived. It discusses the Intentional Fallacy by Wimsatt and Beardsley, who argue that intention is irrelevant, and contrasts this with Knapp and Michaels' view that the artist's intended meaning is the only valid interpretation. Noel Carroll offers a middle ground, suggesting intention is one part of understanding art. The video concludes by acknowledging the complexity of artistic interpretation.

In what way does contemporary philosopher Noel Carroll view the relevance of an artist's intentions?

What complexities are involved in the interpretation of art as suggested in the text?