This paper has two goals. On the one hand it pretends to give account
for why Psychology has so many difficulties to explain the production
and the comprehension of art. On the other hand, it tries to point out
what kind of research would allow us to reach a Psychology of art. I
have specially considered: 1. the work of Gardner, as he is a pioneer.
2. That of Vigouroux, who has opened a new line of research. 3. The c
lassic work of Vygotski, in order to recognize that he has been one of
the first in claiming that Psychology must be able to explain the aes
thetic reaction.