Combining Texts

Ideas for 'Croce and Collingwood', 'German Philosophy 1760-1860' and 'Introductions to 'Aesthetics and the Phil of Art''

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     choose another area for these texts

display all the ideas for this combination of texts

---

7 ideas

21. Aesthetics / A. Aesthetic Experience / 1. Aesthetics

20327	Modern attention has moved from the intrinsic properties of art to its relational properties [Lamarque/Olson]
	Full Idea: In modern discussions, rather than look for intrinsic properties of objects, including aesthetic or formal properties, attention has turned to extrinsic or relational properties, notably of a social, historical, or 'institutional' nature.
	From: Lamargue,P/Olson,SH (Introductions to 'Aesthetics and the Phil of Art' [2004], Pt 1)
	A reaction: Lots of modern branches of philosophy have made this move, which seems to me like a defeat. We want to know why things have the relations they do. Just mapping the relations is superficial Humeanism.

20416	By 1790 aestheticians were mainly trying to explain individual artistic genius [Kemp]
	Full Idea: By 1790 the idea that a central task for the aesthetician was to explain or at least adequately to describe the phenomenon of the individual artistic genius had definitely taken hold.
	From: Gary Kemp (Croce and Collingwood [2012], Intro)
	A reaction: Hence when Kant and Hegel write about art, though are only really thinking of the greatest art (which might be in touch with the sublime or Spirit etc.). Nowadays I think we expect accounts of art to cover modest amateur efforts as well.

21. Aesthetics / B. Nature of Art / 1. Defining Art

20326	Early 20th cent attempts at defining art focused on significant form, intuition, expression, unity [Lamarque/Olson]
	Full Idea: In the early twentieth century there were numerous attempts at defining the essence art. Significant form, intuition, the expression of emotion, organic unity, and other notions, were offered to this end.
	From: Lamargue,P/Olson,SH (Introductions to 'Aesthetics and the Phil of Art' [2004], Pt 1)
	A reaction: As far as I can see the whole of aesthetics was demolished in one blow by Marcel Duchamp's urinal. Artists announce: we will tell you what art is; you should just sit and listen. Compare the invention of an anarchic sport.

21. Aesthetics / B. Nature of Art / 4. Art as Expression

20417	Expression can be either necessary for art, or sufficient for art (or even both) [Kemp]
	Full Idea: Seeing art as expression has two components: 1) if something is a work of art, then it is expressive, 2) if something is expressive, then it is a work of art. So expression can be necessary or sufficient for art. (or both, for Croce and Collingwood).
	From: Gary Kemp (Croce and Collingwood [2012], 1)
	A reaction: I take the idea that art 'expresses' the feelings of an artist to be false. Artists are more like actors. Nearly all art has some emotional impact, which is of major importance, but I don't think 'expression' is a very good word for that.

20419	We don't already know what to express, and then seek means of expressing it [Kemp]
	Full Idea: One cannot really know, or be conscious of, what it is that one is going to express, and then set about expressing it; indeed if one is genuinely conscious of it then one has already expressed it.
	From: Gary Kemp (Croce and Collingwood [2012], 1)
	A reaction: That pretty conclusively demolishes the idea that art is expression. I picture Schubert composing at the piano: he doesn't feel an emotion, and then hunt for its expression on the keyboard; he seeks out expressive phrases by playing.

20418	The horror expressed in some works of art could equallly be expressed by other means [Kemp]
	Full Idea: The horror or terror of Edvard Much's 'The Scream' could in principle be expressed by different paintings, or even by works of music.
	From: Gary Kemp (Croce and Collingwood [2012], 1)
	A reaction: A very good simple point against the idea that the point of art is expression. It leaves out the very specific nature of each work of art!

21. Aesthetics / B. Nature of Art / 7. Ontology of Art

20330	The dualistic view says works of art are either abstract objects (types), or physical objects [Lamarque/Olson]
	Full Idea: The dualistic view of the arts holds that works of art come in two fundamentally different kinds: those that are abstract entities, i.e. types, and those that are physical objects (tokens).
	From: Lamargue,P/Olson,SH (Introductions to 'Aesthetics and the Phil of Art' [2004], Pt 2)
	A reaction: Paintings are the main reason for retaining physical objects. Strawson 1974 argues that paintings are only physical because we cannot yet perfectly reproduce them. I agree. Works of art are types, not tokens.