 Noël Carroll (2001) thought that Dewey’s theory of art fails to cover many contemporary works which then act as counterexamples to his definition of art as experience. For example, as Rothko’s paintings can overwhelm us at one shot, their experience may not have Dewey’s requisite development and closure. Carroll also thought that the view that experiences of art must be unified is too narrow. Cage’s 4′33″, which Carroll takes to obviously be a work of art, does not consummate or have qualitative unity. Finally, he thought that if experiences of everyday dispersion can be aesthetic then Dewey’s distinction between “an experience” and disconnected daily experience dissolves. This might be contrasted to Philip Jackson’s (1998) defense of Dewey against similar criticisms, especially with respect to Cage’s 4′33″ which he saw as fitting Dewey’s definition nicely. For Jackson, it is the experience that requires unity, not the physical product.