Aesthetics

This topic is about art and beauty, both considered as broadly rather than narrowly defined. Art in this context encompasses all fields of artistic endeavour, including painting, sculpture, architecture and other visual arts, music, poetry, literature, rap, TV and movies, wine-making, cheese-making and fine cuisine. Maybe even mathematics (mathematicians often talk of ‘beautiful’ ideas or proofs, and contrast them with ‘brute force’ or other ‘ugly’ methods).

There are a number of broad areas of aesthetic inquiry. These include:

    • what is beauty?
    • what can be considered an art work?
    • in the case of items that were created with the intention of being art works, can we devise an objective standard of quality that doesn’t appear to be arbitrary? What are the characteristics of such a standard?

Before starting, we might like to ask ‘why does this matter to us? Why should we care what we mean by beauty or by great art?’ One answer is that to many people this may not matter, but to some it matters very much. If we feel very strongly that a certain artwork is truly marvellous, we want to believe that this is more than an arbitrary, subjective preference on our part. To admit otherwise feels like it is cheapening or degrading the sensation of pleasure we experience from it. Conversely, if we believe an artwork we love is truly great according to a universal standard, that validates our own judgement of its greatness, and by validating it, heightens the sensation.

Secondly, when we get great pleasure from something, we often want to share that pleasure. Sharing it can enhance our enjoyment of the pleasure. If we believe that an artwork is great according to some universal standard, that gives us greater confidence that others may feel as we do about it, and that makes us feel more empowered to tell them about it, share it and hope that they will feel the same.

Thirdly, it enables us to be more economical with the time we devote to appraising art. If we just randomly select art to consider, we will only rarely come upon something we enjoy, as most of the art out in the world is dross. If however, we believe there is some universal standard of artistic greatness, and we identify people or sources whom we trust as good judges of that, we can focus our listening, watching and reading on items recommended by those sources, and that is likely to greatly increase the amount of art that we find enjoyable.

Here are some questions that bear upon the issue of what great art is. I suggest we try to think about our own positions on these questions prior to the meeting:

    1. Is containing a message always a positive feature of an art work?
    2. Does it detract from the greatness of an artwork if its main impact depends on an understanding of the artist’s intent and/or the context of its creation?
    3. Is eliciting an emotional response in some/many/most/all people a necessary characteristic of a great art work? Does it matter what the emotional response is? eg does disgust count? (consider Saw films or scatological ‘art works’). What emotional responses should definitely count as an indicator of quality and which ones definitely should not? Does better art elicit stronger emotional responses?
    4. Is beauty a necessary characteristic of a great art work?
    5. Is beauty entirely in the eye of the beholder, or only partly? If the latter, which parts?
    6. Can an ‘art work’ that makes you think but has no beauty be considered great? eg Marcel Duchamp’s ‘Fountain’, or Martin Creed’s ‘Lights going on and off’.
    7. Is difficulty of execution a necessary characteristic? Are there any great art works that would have been easy to execute, once one had the initial idea? ‘Found Objects’ are examples of potentially interesting ideas that have no difficulty of execution.
    8. Plato asserted a strong connection, almost an identification, of beauty with goodness (this is discussed in Plato’s ‘Symposium’ and also in the Taliaferro book, both listed below). Do you agree with that? Bear in mind that Plato meant beauty in a broad sense rather than just superficial. A person’s beauty would encompass how pleasing their character is, rather than just their appearance. Is one reason, perhaps a main reason, why we adopt a particular ethical code that we find it optimises the beauty in the world? For example, does a utilitarian wish to maximise human happiness because she regards a world with more happiness in it as more beautiful than one with less?

Here is a challenging piece of music. Do you like it? I can’t figure it out myself. Schoenberg’s Pierrot Lunaire: http://www.archive.org/details/SchnbergPierrotLunaire

Here is an unquestionably (in my opinion) great and beautiful piece of music: Beethoven’s Pastoral Symphony (after the annoying jingle and announcer that occupy the first 15 seconds):

http://www.dw-world.de/popups/popup_single_mediaplayer/0,,2155685_type_audio_struct_9706_contentId_2138996,00.html

Guernica (painting with a message): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guernica_(painting)

Bigger image of Guernica: http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQtIAetwS_U4bcIC8bgDnGOuOuhi-vQ9JZvQKRgxr90kZEoZdx2

Philosophers

The philosophers whose names I have come across most in the writings on this topic are David Hume, Immanuel Kant (both 18th century) and Roger Scruton (contemporary).

Preparation materials

The readings are not as good as I would like them to be. Some are a little over-academic and jargon-infected. Perhaps that’s the unfortunate consequence of mixing art and philosophy. Nevertheless, they present some of the important ideas, questions and dilemmas. The Roger Scruton YouTube videos in particular (ten minutes each) are a very easy entry point. Scruton is a very conservative, some would say reactionary, English philosopher, who is very controversial because of his views. However, his writings on beauty are well regarded even by those such as AC Grayling who profoundly disagree with him. The podcasts should be pretty easy too.

Stuff I have read or viewed so far

Stuff I haven’t read, but which looks relevant

I’ll try to look at some of these before the 11th.

Podcasts

I haven’t listened to any of these yet, but I will.

Five podcasts from the Philosophy Bites website. Each podcast is about 15 minutes.

http://philosophybites.com/aesthetics/

Series of eight 50 minute lectures from Oxford University on Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art: http://www.philosophy.ox.ac.uk/podcasts/aesthetics_and_the_philosophy_of_art

“The Art Instinct - evolution and aesthetics” (ABC Radio National: “The philosophers’ zone”):

http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2010/11/pze_20101113.mp3

“Art for Art’s sake”

http://www.arthistoryunstuffed.com/podcast-5-romantic-aesthetics/

The Guerilla Radio Show: ‘Aesthetics’ http://www.guerrillaradioshow.com/wp-content/uploads/aesthetics.mp3