Whether the Aesthetic Quality Is Subjective or Objective - Essay Example

Anuja Chandramouli Aesthetics 06 June 2006 AESTHETICS INTRODUCTION In the eighteenth century there was significant development pertaining to judgments of aesthetic value. At one stage aesthetics was relegated entirely to the realm of subjectivism, but soon adherents to objectivism were up in arms against their detractors. Those belonging to the former school of thought contest that beauty lies only "in the eye of the beholder" whereas the latter claim that aesthetic characteristics exist independently of the mind. Ultimately the question is whether the aesthetic quality is subjective or objective and if it is possible to have objective standards of taste. An attempt has been made to answer this question by comparing and critically analyzing the works of Hume, Kant and Bell on the issue of aesthetic judgment and taste. DAVID HUME: OF THE STANDARD OF TASTE Hume was an empiricist; he believed that all knowledge was derived exclusively from the senses based on individual perception and resulting from experience. Thus his viewpoint is essentially subjective. He feels that aesthetic enjoyment comes from deep within and one needs "that delicacy of imagination" without which one will be unable to appreciate the finer points of great art. Sentiment is another factor which affects one's reaction to works of art. There is no right or wrong sentiment because it "has a reference to nothing beyond itself". Beauty is another quality that "exists merely in the mind". And yet in the midst of all this subjectivity he never implies that aesthetic judgement is entirely personal. In fact common sense which he sets much store by indicates that responses may be right or wrong but some are invariably much better than others. Hume seeks to establish a standard of taste, "a rule" that works by "confirming one sentiment, and condemning another." He prescribes five factors that are prerequisites for a true judge - "Strong sense united to delicate sentiment, improved by practice, perfected by comparison and cleared of all prejudice". This standard attempts to adhere to the universal principles of taste while smoothing out individual differences. However there are two factors which prevent the functioning of the standard mechanism - "the one is the different humours of particular men; the other, the particular manners and opinions of our age and country". And on this note we can conclude Hume's account of aesthetic judgement. IMMANUEL KANT: THE CRITIQUE OF AESTHETIC JUDGEMENT Kant is the father of modern aesthetics. His invaluable contribution to philosophy at large and aesthetics in particular has consolidated his position as one of the most influential thinkers of all time. At the very onset of the essay Kant states that beauty is discerned "by means of the imagination" in conjunction with understanding as opposed to "a view of cognition". Feelings of pleasure or displeasure play a pivotal role in aesthetic judgement. Pleasure is merely a mental state and it has nothing to do with the properties of the object that elicits the response. Thus according to Kant, the "determining ground" is largely subjective. However there is scope for objectivity under certain controlled circumstances. Kant asserts that the element of interest in the judgement of aesthetic quality tends to be "partial and not a pure judgement of taste". A complete state of "disinterestedness" coupled with the imagination and naked perception must be preserved for effective judgement. If this state can be affected it is possible to arrive at a judgement that has "universal validity". CLIVE BELL: THE AESTHETIC HYPOTHESIS Bell does not mince words in his aesthetic hypothesis. He states that "The starting point for all systems of aesthetics must be the personal experience of a peculiar emotion." Of course the same work of art may provide different emotions in different people but "there is a particular kind of emotion" which is common to all kinds of "visual art". This aesthetic emotion may or may not be felt by people as it is an entirely personal experience. Those who are capable of experiencing this emotion find themselves transported in an ecstasy of rapture to "the cold, white peaks of art." Bell asserts that the defining quality of all visual art is the "significant form" which alone provokes aesthetic emotion. This term includes the particular "combination of lines and colours" brought together by "unknown and mysterious laws". His stance is subjective in that he claims "We have no means of recognizing a work of art than our feeling for it." However having established that "all aesthetic judgements must be matters of personal taste," he adds "that it would be rash to assert that no theory of aesthetics can have general validity." Besides "significant form" is an objective quality which provokes a subjective reaction. COMPARISON OF THE WORKS OF HUME, KANT AND BELL Hume, Kant and Bell were of the opinion that aesthetic judgement lies in a person's response to a work of art. The process is an intensely personal and moving experience; therefore the foundation for the judgement of aesthetic quality is a subjective one. And yet neither of them is willing to oversimplify the issue by putting down the vagaries of aesthetic judgement to individual idiosyncrasies. Thus they have chosen to distance themselves from the changeable standards of relativism. The three of them take pains to acknowledge that aesthetic judgement has the potential to be objective while still retaining its validity. Perhaps Kant put it best in his critique of aesthetic judgement, "Every reference of representation is capable of being objective, even that of sensation". A combination of doctrines is apparent in the works of Hume, Kant and Bell. Hume is one of the greatest empiricists in the history of philosophy. He believed that all learning was irrevocably linked to experience based on subjective perception. In his "Of the Standard of Taste", Hume relaxes his customary subjectivism while not renouncing it and explores the objective qualities in aesthetic judgement. He acknowledges the vast variety in taste and opinion and then proceeds to point out that there is a vein of unanimity- a byproduct of logic that is coursing through the terrain of individual differences. His standard of taste is designed to cater to this unanimity as far as possible. Kant follows the empiricist tradition established by Hume, but he seeks to fine-tune the mechanism of taste as established by Hume. He grants that knowledge can be gained by experience but also asserts the rationalist belief that deduction on the basis of reason is another source of learning. This line of reasoning is a characteristic of his "Critique of Aesthetic judgement". He endorses a clinical detachment in the approach to art to ensure that the resulting judgement will be at its purest. His proposal of a reflective "disinterestedness" in aesthetic judgement is one of the most celebrated theories in philosophy. Bell's "Aesthetic Hypothesis" is essentialist as well as formalist with regard to the views outlined on aesthetic emotion and "significant form" respectively. This is akin to the subjectivism seen in the works of Hume and Kant. Like his predecessors Bell eschews a narrow outlook to the issue by not descending to the relativism brought on by a strictly subjectivist stand. Instead by asserting that "significant form" is the only quality peculiar to all visual arts capable of arousing the aesthetic emotion, he gives an objectivist slant to his viewpoint. It is obvious from their writings that Hume, Kant and Bell share a common and abiding love for the aesthetic. They respect the uniqueness of art and condemn its being suffocated by strict rules necessary for aesthetic judgement. According to the trio, the ultimate test for art lies in its universal appeal and sublimity. Good art transcends language, culture, prejudice and even time. Hume reiterates this point by using the works of past masters like Homer, Virgil, Cicero and Terrence whose appeal is timeless and eternal. Kant stresses that "universal assent" is needed in order to deem a work of art as agreeable. Bell has described this beautifully, "It is the mark of great art that its appeal is universal and eternal". That perhaps is the final statement on the judgement of aesthetic quality. Hume, Kant and Bell suggest that a particular disposition is essential for a keen appreciation as well as for the judgement of art. This indefinable quality possibly a delicate sensibility is a fine indicator of judgement and taste and puts its possessor that much closer to being an ideal judge. CONCLUSION In summation it can be said that for a valid judgement of aesthetic quality, a delicate amalgam of subjectivity and objectivity would be ideal. It is possible for the two to exist side by side in peaceful co-existence. But if this viewpoint appears far too utopian, it would not be inexcusable to seek recourse in either of the two as per personal preference. Because art exists in myriad forms- it may be a veritable smorgasbord for the intellect or a delightful feast for the senses, one may splurge on the delight afforded by it or choose to partake of it in dainty morsels, ultimately there is something in art for everyone. A critic's job is to open the viewer's eyes to hidden pleasures not force opinions down anybody's throat. Thus for aesthetics, Keats immortal lines should be its motto, "'Beauty is truth, truth beauty,'- that is all/ Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know." Works Cited Cooper, D.E (ed.).Aesthetics: the classic readings. Oxford: Blackwell Publishings, 1997. . Read More