In 1957, Paul Taylor was a dancer with the Martha Graham Company and an aspiring choreographer. In a concert of his own works, he presented a work called "Duet." The curtain rose in the theater, revealing Taylor and his partner sitting motionless on stage. After exactly three minutes, the curtain descended and the audience sat quietly in the theater, not sure whether to applaud or boo. Critic Louis Horst responded by publishing a blank column of white space in the publication, Dance Observer.

Is "Duet" a work of art, based on the information given above? Why/why not?

The famous painter Richard Avangard, has a pet chimpanzee, Betsy, who roams at will in Avangard's studio. Avangard returned to his studio one day to discover that Betsy had fallen into a large container of paint and had then apparently run wildly over a large canvas on the floor. Avangard anonymously ships Betsy's "product" to the local art museum, without any explanation or identification of its origins.

The museum director decides to exhibit the anonymous "work" at the museum. The "work" is greatly admired by the viewing public; through word-of-mouth publicity, the museum is jammed with people who want to see the "work." A review of new works on exhibit at the museum by a local art critic mentions the anonymous "work" and evaluates it as promising work by an unknown artist.

Is Betsy's "product" a work of art? Why/why not? What facts are relevant in making this assessment?

In 1959, Robert Rauschenberg, a young though not inconsequential artist, asked Willem de Kooning to participate in an art project. De Kooning, who was not only older and much more established than Rauschenberg, but whose works sold for considerable sums of money, agreed to participate and gave Rauschenberg what he considered to be an important drawing. The drawing de Kooning selected was executed in heavy crayon, grease pencil, ink, and graphite. Rauschenberg spent a month on the work, erasing it completely. Then he placed the de Kooning drawing in a gold leaf frame and hand-lettered the date and title on the drawing: "Erased de Kooning Drawing, 1953". Rauschenberg had not only erased de Kooning's work, but he had also exhibited the "erasure" as his own work of art. Traces of ink and crayon remain on the paper, which measures 19" x 14-1/2". The "work" is now in the private collection of Raushcenberg.

In an interview with art critic Calvin Tomkins, Raushcenberg said: "I had been working for some time at erasing, with the idea that I wanted to create a work of art by that method. Not just by deleting certain lines, you understand, but by erasing the whole thing. Using my own work wasn't satisfactory . . . I realized that it had to be something by someone who everybody agreed was great, and the most logical person for that was de Kooning. . . . finally he gave me a drawing, and I took it home. It wasn't easy, by any means. The drawing was done with a hard line, and it was greasy too, so I had to work very hard on it, using every sort of eraser. But in the end it really worked. I liked the result. I felt it was a legitimate work of art, created by the technique of erasing."

• Develop as many reasons as you can to defend the claim that "Erased de Kooning" is a work of art, based on the information given above.

• Develop as many reasons as you can to reject the claim that "Erased de Kooning" is a work of art, based on the information given above.

July 24, 2000