midterm Flashcards
Aesthetic Attitude
Stolnitz
- disinterested, sympathetic attention to and comtemplation of any object of awareness whatever for its own sake
- object is not seen in a fragmentary or passing manner, as it is in practical perception… its whole nature and character are dwelt upon
- isolates the object and the viewer
Two kinds of Value of Experience via Aesthetic Attitude
X is instrumentally valuable = X helps us to get to something else that is valuable
X is intrinsically valuable = X itself is valuable
Forgery
artefact created with the intention that others believe it is an X, when in fact isn’t an X. Copy or fake.
Lessing’s response: Being forged seems irrelevant to a works aesthetic value.
Genuineness vs Forgery
-non-aesthetic standard of judgement
-all peripheral information to the creation of the art belongs to areas such as biography, history of art, sociology and psychology
Aesthetic Experience
-autonomous experience, does not account for fact which is not aesthetically perceivable
-considering genuine art superior is a piece of snobbery
Originality
imaginative novelty or spontaneity which is a mark of great works of art
Dutton on Forgery
- believes that forgery makes a difference in value of art
- every work of art involves performance (solving problems, overcoming obstacles, make do with materials)
- object must be distinguished from circumstances of its origin, but not divorced
Why does forgery matter?
artistic achievement
true judges
strong sense, delicate sentiment, practiced, perfected by comparison, cleared of all prejudice
Why cant all true judges agree on a standard of taste?
-often defects prevent or weaken the influence of universal taste principles
universal principles of taste
- if something has feature f, then it is pleasing to everyone
- influentiality
Hume on Standards of Taste
there is no standards because every judge is different
Isn’t beauty subjective? (Hume’s response)
uniformity amongst men is the judge of true beauty
Ducasse on the standard of taste
- connoisseurship makes possible aesthetic pleasures
- persons who are not connoisseurs cannot experience
- makes impossible the aesthetic pleasures which only the less aesthetically sensitive can taste
- for ranking of beauties, the only principles such as relative intensity of the pleasure felt, its relative duration and relative freedom from admixture of pain
why is forged work seen as less valuable?
- lacking originality
- lacks moral value
Ducasse on Mass Fashion
why give up what you prefer for what’s in? A social phenomenon.
Zangwill on Fashion
things appear fashionable… this notion enters into the content of our perceptual experiences. But… there is an element of projection: when something appears fashionable to us, it involves an illusion.
What makes something fashionable? (Farrenikova and Prinz)
X is fashionable if, and only if:
1) At some time in the near future, X will no longer be fashionable (temporally bounded trends are essential)
2) It is worn by many people (“No following, no fashionability”)
3) It is endorsed by individuals regarded as experts
4) People wear it because its aesthetic value is endorsed by experts
Parson’s Response: “How can we trust the ‘aesthetic experts’ when they keep changing their minds”?
Solution #1: Aesthetic value can change.
Solution #2: Fashion trends don’t always end.
Solution #3: Aesthetic judgements of fashion remain constant.
fashion choice = aesthetic judgement + sociological judgement
Why think that aesthetic judgements of fashion remain constant?
aesthetic value of objects don’t change, just the judgements.
Morality and Aesthetic Appreciation
A work of art is morally flawed when the work invites us to consider sympathetically (as true) some moral view that we believe is false.
Is a work that is morally flawed also thereby aesthetically flawed? (Stolnitz and Hume)
Stolnitz: No, not relevant to aesthetics, disrupts aesthetic attitude.
Hume: Yes, immorality must be able to disfigure artefacts, make unable to relish.
Hume’s Response: We resist imagining that moral falsehoods are true. Why?
We worry that imagining a moral falsehood will lead us to believe it.
- we worry that imagining a moral falsehood will mess up our moral orientation
- we simply find it immoral to even imagine a moral falsehood being true
Is a work that is morally flawed also thereby aesthetically flawed? (Yes and No)
Yes: We cannot imaginatively accept the moral vision of a work. If that moral vision is flawed.
No: We should put aside our own moral beliefs, and imaginatively accept the works moral vision
Fictionally true
true in the fictional world, true in the story
Walton on Moral and Aesthetic Appreciation
-we do not give up on the Reality Principle as far as morals go… authors don’t have the same freedom to manipulate moral characteristics as they do other aspects
Why can’t we imagine moral falsehoods are true?
-our inability to understand fully what it would be like for these relations to be different.
