Aesthetics and Characterizations of Art - Essay Example

Aesthetics Throughout the annuals of recorded history and given consideration of prehistoric artifacts (i.e., such as cave drawings and the implementation of primitive tools), aesthetics and the arts have played a major and prominent role in the development and cultivation of not only cultural ideas of fledging and developed civilizations, but individual statements and connotations of those members within the confines of a particular culture or civilization. Without question, the mere meaning of the word art is subject to interpretation, especially considering the mystifying world of twentieth-century art. Nonetheless, the purpose of this paper is an effort to demonstrate that art is definable. The interchangeability and kaleidoscopic dimensions of art is a forecast of profound divergences, aspects, and opinions in every realm of existence. Art is ubiquitous … it is seen everywhere and is created by everyone. Karl Marx stated in so many words that the history of the world is the history of class struggle and while this may be true to a point, the history of the world may very well be the history and development of art and the body of philosophy called aesthetics. “In short, the history of human experience is a history of the development of arts (Cohoon 2000).” Often time’s art is representative of political ideas and statements and because of these ideas and statements, art can narrowly, and at times broadly, be construed to have definition. A definition of aesthetics is a branch of philosophy concerned with the perception and quintessence of what regards artistic merit versus lack of artistic merit. Aesthetics also concerns inquiries into whether artistic qualities underlie objectively qualified definitions of a particular mode or character of what constitutes aesthetics. With respect to this topic, Philosophers ask many questions about whether a work of art is beautiful or ugly (i.e., ugly meaning that which cannot be considered having artistic value), and ultimately weight in a multitude of various interpretations of what a work of art represents. As we will see in this paper, there are diverse and even, at times, conflicting views of what philosophers mean when they say a particular piece of work has artistic merit. Characterizations of Art There are narrowly focused universal generalities about what art and aesthetics represent. With regard to aesthetics, perception is constant and always present. Some of the requirements of creative perception are as follows: 1. Art is elusive; 2. Art is obvious; 3. Corresponds on various planes and is subject to elucidation; 4. Abilities and skills are presence; 5. Relationship exists between what is considered a conscious or unconscious interpretation of art and of our understanding of what is considered our life force, between what is real and what is illusion; 6. Any human creation which contains an idea other than its utilitarian purpose; 7. Creations for the sole purpose of importing what is considered art (i.e., music, paintings, dance, architecture, sculpting, theater); and 8. Patriot and Atavistic idealism expressed in all art forms. Judgments of Art Art is also at the mercy of judgments of value. Judgments value and gage such elements as to what consideration good art is as opposed to what bad art is and, therefore, requires a basis of criticism that in turns requires a body of standards. According to some schools of thought, perception and acuity cleave unto experiences and reactions to great art or degrading art and such experiences skew the hypothesis of such experiences. Nonetheless and despite the divergences of the understanding of quality, once there is agreement, aesthetic choices are manifested, the value of art determines the faculty to surpass the limits of the judgments and a universal chord of acceptance is achieved. Conversely, George Dickie, a controversial philosopher of art and aesthetic in the analytical tradition and whose body of work, debated hotly in the 1970s and 1980s, has argued against numerous generally accepted theories of the meaning of art and aesthetics. Dickie stated that an institutional definition of art derives from education and other distinct social factors thereby canceling out the meaning of art as a function seen on all levels of human existence, despite education and social environments. John Dewey According to John Dewey, “the roots of aesthetic experience lie, Dewey argues, in commonplace experience, in the consummatory experiences that are ubiquitous in the course of human life. There is no legitimacy to the conceit cherished by some art enthusiasts that aesthetic enjoyment is the privileged endowment of the few. Whenever there is coalescence into an immediately enjoyed qualitative unity of meanings and values drawn from previous experience and present circumstances, life then takes on an aesthetic quality--what Dewey called having "an experience (Field 2005)." In this passage, Dewey brings into focus a broad by important aspect of the meaning of art in that it is not a medium of only a select few but, rather, a universal vista of a tremendously broad definition that takes into account most experiences of a regular variety that exists in normal day-to-day living. “In short, the history of human experience is a history of the development of arts (Cohoon 2000).” Conversely, Immanuel Kant was primarily concerned with judgments of taste. Objects are judged beautiful, he proposed, when they satisfy a disinterested desire or one that does not involve personal interests or needs. It follows from his perspective that beautiful objects have no specific purpose and that judgments of beauty are not expressions of mere personal preference but are universal. He further stated that one cannot be certain others will be satisfied by objects he or she judges to be beautiful, but, rather, that one can at least say that others ought to be satisfied. The basis for one’s response to beauty exists in the structure of one’s mind.” Here we see two distinct different views of the meaning of art. Aesthetic Realism During a market day on April 26, 1937, during the Spanish Civil War, the town of Guernica, with a population of about 7,000, saw the frightening speed and destruction of war when “Hitler supplied planes, tanks, technicians and the Condor Legion, an air force unit which distinguished itself by the obliteration of the Spanish town of Guernica and its civilian inhabitants (Shirer 1959).” Picasso’s great mural, Guernica, encapsulates and encompasses the figurative painting of the horrors and senselessness of wars -- its destruction, its cruelty, its staggering loss of life, and its embodiment of evil. As an example of art being defined one only has to view and understand Picasso’s Guernica to see that in this particular case art has a definite and absolute meaning. In many respects, this is a case of aesthetic realism. “Aesthetic Realism teaches that the largest, most constant hope of man is to like the world honestly, with no evasions; that is, on an aesthetic basis. All art arises from that hope, and affirms the fact that the structure of reality is aesthetic and we are right to do everything we can to honestly like it, or, perhaps more importantly, have appreciation and understanding of it. Reality, aesthetic realism teaches, is itself aesthetic. And the Aesthetic Realism education is based on the great principle (Koppleman 1999-2005): Picasso’s Guernica is an unquestionably a statement about the Spanish Revolution within the context of aesthetic realism! Leonardo Da Vinci’s painting of the Last Supper, completed in 1498, considered by most art critics to be one of the world’s greatest masterpieces. The Last Supper is more than just a mere painting, it is an extraordinary creation of a pictorial representation of one of the most sacred and important events in the Christian doctrine of spiritual progression and salvation. David Hume David Hume’s philosophies had profound effects on contemporaries such as Adam Smith and even Charles Darwin considered Hume to a central influence. Born in Edinburgh in 1711, Hume showed at an early age a precociousness that needed to be harnessed and developed. However, his family wanted him to study law but he preferred reading authors such as Cicero and others of antiquity and pursued his goal of becoming a philosopher. Hume’s critical theories, particularly Of the Standard of Taste, although fragmentary, have drawn increasingly serious attention in the twentieth century, yet even in 1976 Peter Jones, in reassessing Hume’s aesthetics, (Jones 1976) can describe one of the most substantial criticisms Of the Standard of Taste as deeply underrated. Further, Jones praises it as “subtle and highly complex.” There is much truth to Jones’ praises especially given that Hume was a philosopher of the seventeenth century and his style of writing was definitely in a manner that writers and readers of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries would consider somehow both anachronistic and archaic. Nonetheless, once getting past the lofty verbiage, one is struck with Hume’s methodical and detailed insights into the meaning and understanding of a standard of taste with respect to art! Hume states, “The sentiments of men often differ with regard to beauty and deformity of all kinds, even while their general discourse is the same. There are certain terms in every language, which import blame, and others praise; and all men, who use the same tongue, must agree in their application of them. Every voice is united in applauding elegance, propriety, simplicity, spirit in writing; and in blaming fustian, affectation, coldness and a false brilliancy (Gracyk 2004). ” In this particular passage, Hume is giving a definition of taste that broadly postulates that even though the opinions and sentiments differ amongst men, most individuals have concrete similarities and definitions as to what taste means. For our intent and purposes here, a "sentiment" is an emotion and Hume is describing his own position with respect to sentiment. It is of interest to note that in Hume’s position between what is good and bad can be a basis on reasoning about things such as morality, which he believes, is more properly felt than judged. This view of morality as a sentiment incurred Hume’s contemporaries to attack this position for opening the door to relativism, which they regarded as the inevitable consequence of saying that moral differences are based on human feelings. Relativism is a doctrine of belief that there is no single view of any philosophy, art, etc. and that it is a family of view and opinions whose basic premis is that some central paramater of judgment, evaluation, thought, reality, and experience is somehow relative to something else. Connectivity is, under certain circumstances, synonomous with relativism. Relativism further states the connectivity with a body of ethics, standards of justification, moral principles or truth that are frequently said to be relative to and employ language, culture, shared histories, religious affiliations, or biological makeup, to mention a few. Although relativistic thoughts often lead to inadequate conclusions, there is something alluring and vaguely agreeable about them, and they have captivated a wide range of thinkers from a wide range of philosophical traditions. Argument as to Why Art Cannot be Defined Conversely, as most important things in life, art cannot usefully be defined according to some philosophers. What matters is experience, not a priori prescription. Any true definition of art will have to be so general as to be vacuous. Lack of Definition of Art Despite all the definitions of what constitutes art, there are definitions of what art is not! Many art critics and patrons view the work of Jackson Pollock to be nothing more than throwing paint on a canvas, wall, or floor without recognizable skill or any in-depth thoughts whatsoever. Nihilism is a philosophy that embraces the view that the world and all of human existence, including art, has no meaning whatsoever and there is no purpose, logical truth or any true morals or values in existence – nothing really exists. Philosophers who considered nihilists take the position that nothing exists and the experiences that humans have does not really exist! Nihilism is a position usually staged against a particular idea such as dada or deconstructionism. During the Red Scare in the 1950s, the United States government spread propaganda equating nihilism with anarchy. “Nihilism is also a characteristic that has been ascribed to time periods: for example Baudrillard has called postmodernity a nihilistic epoch, and some Christian theologians and figures of authority assert that modernity and post modernity represent the rejection of God, and therefore are nihilist (Wikipedia 2005). As an atheistic, Friedrich Nietzsche’s views were in some ways a proponent of nilihism. For example, he viewed the Christian religion as a nilistic religion primarily because it downplayed eartly experiences for those in the afterlife. Conclusion As we have seen in this paper so far, there are many different opinions on what a definition of art is, but it can be said forthrightly that the vast majority of philosophers, art critics and common men and women that art definitely can be defined, but within that sweeping point of view there are countless classifications and definitions as to what art is in a particular mode of consideration. As we have seen, one of the most influential, American educators and philosophers was John Dewey who believed that education played a highly significant role in determining how art can be definted. Dewey assumed that change in all things is the central fact of life. As a disciple of the age of science, he asserted that scientific method provides the only reliable guide to knowledge and right behavior! Because such knowledge, Dewey recognized, could only be a series of working hypotheses within a sculpted framwork relative to time and place. Art in Dewey’s opinion was a manifestation of education and socialization within a narrow definition of the world. It is fair to say that Dewey may be guilty of a belief that art flourishes in more highly developed societies than in those less so. Conversely, Hume’s views of taste and art revolve around a theory of moral and aesthetic value, that is based on sentiment (emotion) and not judgment, as we see with Dewey. Taste is a personal and based on a feeling without any academic background. Taste is a personal response to one’s life and those things within one’s life – it is an aesthetic response. Further Hume’s premise is you either feel something, or you do not. Kant’s views of beauty and art are very similar to Hume’s in that he believed that art was something that satisfied the senses and was beyond judgment. From the research conducted it can be said that art, emphatically, is an entity of sorts that can, without question be defined. Bibliography "Aesthetics," (2005) Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia http://encarta.msn.com © 1997-2005 Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved. Cohoon, James, (Ed.) (2005, p. 15) Humanity in Perspective; Sages Press, Vancouver, B.C., Cohoon, James, (Ed.) (2005, p. 25) Humanity in Perspective; Sages Press, Vancouver, B.C., Field, Richard (ed) (2005) John Dewey (1859-1952), [Online] The Internet of Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available from: http://www.iep.utm.edu/d/dewey.htm Gracyk, Thomas. (June 10, 2004) Of the Standard of Taste, [Online] Minnosota State University Moorhead. Available from www/library.uwa.edu.au/guides/citingsource/Harvard.html [15 Dec 1005]. Jones, Peter, Hume’s Aesthetics Reassessed. Philosophical Quarterly 26 (1976), pp. 48-62. Shirer, William. (1959) Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, Simon & Schuster p. 297 Wikipedia (Dec. 13, 2005) Nihilism, [Online] GNW Free Documentation Available: www.en.wikipedia.org/siki/Nihilism Read More