What is art? There is an ongoing quest for a definitive
answer to what makes something art. Art is the artist's personal and creative
act. As viewers, our perception of art influences our tastes, our view of what
is beautiful, and how we evaluate and view an art form. Perception is a personal
and subjective thing. How a person views things can be influenced by many different variables but follow trends of aesthetics and reasoning.
Reflecting on 18th-century
Scottish Philosopher David Hume's view on “taste” and “aesthetic” in his "
Of the Standard of Taste," which appeared in 1757 in his writing “Four
Dissertations,” it is shown that Hume argues that taste varies. Hume argues
that even a group of individuals raised similarly and exposed to the same
things may have differing tastes, for taste is an “inter-subjective” thing
(1757). Even if they agree, they may choose to use different words to describe,
which creates differences in perception. Hume reflects on the problem of
whether there is a standard of taste and how we arrive at it when taste is such
a varied thing. Hume argues that the “finer emotions of the mind” create a
standard of taste, and only people with the time and availability for leisure
thoughts and happy environments can fine-tune their taste. These objects draw
forth the finer emotions in people and leave lasting effects on the mind (Hume,
1757). These “delicate thinkers” are free from the hardships of the mind and can
show true taste. Hume was from the 18th century, and his culture and
environment influenced his perception of taste and beauty. It is hard to find a
person unburdened by the harshness of life who could have delicate mental
clarity, as he states, which is the true indicator of taste. There are
variables in “delicate-minded” individuals, and their perceptions may differ.
Taste is still a fluid thing, but it can be agreed that it is a thing that brings
forth emotions.
Continuing the discourse on the perception of taste and
beauty in the context of art, we turn to another 18th-century philosopher,
Immanuel Kant, and his treatise on beauty. Kant posits that our perceptions of
beauty are not a reflection of our feelings or preferences but are instead
manifested through the objects themselves (Freeland,2003, p.13). Freeland
(2003) further elucidates that “Kant believed that judgments of beauty were
universal and grounded in the real world, even though they were not actually
‘objective’” (p.13). According to Kant, beauty can evoke emotions in the
viewer, but this is secondary to the object's inherent nature. Kant views
beautiful objects as ‘purposiveness without a purpose.’ This starkly contrasts
Hume's view that beauty can only be perceived by a "finer mind"
unaffected by the harsh realities of life, suggesting that beauty is a
naturalistic quality that transcends individual perceptions. Perhaps it is a
mixture of both. With a clear mind, it is easier to analyze and comprehend
information combined with an eye for analyzing the art form's relation to the
natural world.
Image 1: Teresa Murak, Seed, 1989
Modern art pushes this discussion further, with dramatic and
shocking art being creative that would have made Humes and Kant scoff. It can
be argued that controversial art forms can be called art because of the time,
intent, and creative effort put into their creation. One such image by Teresa
Murak called “Seed” (1989) is a scene from a performative art piece where the
artist submerges her body in a mud bath with seeds scattered on top. The artist
lays submerged in the tub for a couple of days and germinates the seeds with
her body's warmth, creating a connection between germination and growth (Doyle,
2023). This symbolizes spiritual growth, with the seeds growing in importance
as a catalyst of change. Much time and creative intent was put into creating this
artwork. That alone gives “seed” the credibility of an art form. This creative
act is full of symbolism and incites introspection into the meaning of growth
in all its dimensions. One can speculate if Humes and Kant would have viewed
the beauty of “Seed” and its credibility as an art form. It could be argued
that a sensitive mind would see the beauty of “Seed” and its performative
beauty of growth. It could also be argued that Kant may have seen the piece concerning
the natural world, that the seeds represent physical, mental, and spiritual
growth. The act of laying in a mud bath for multiple days may be distasteful to
some, and those feelings do not matter in that “Seed” is still beautiful in its
relation to the natural world and its sovereignty. Regardless of what these 18th-century
philosophers may have thought, it is evident that modern art is pushing
boundaries on what is viewed as art.
References
Doyle, J. (2024, January 1). Week 1- Blood and Beauty. Tiffin University. Retrieved March 12, 2024,
from https://online.tiffin.edu/mod/book/view.php?id=1525710&chapterid=5537
Freeland, C. (2003). Art Theory: A Very Short Introduction.
Oxford University Press Academic UK.
https://tiffin-bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/9780191579325
Hume, D. (1757, January 1). Of The Standard of Taste. Hume Archives. Retrieved March 12, 2024,
from https://users.rowan.edu/~clowney/Aesthetics/philos_artists_onart/hume_standard.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment