I had the pleasure of attending the free talk that Wartenberg joined us for on Wednesday evening. We, the group, spoke of many topics, but one upon which we lingered for a time was the role of beauty in art, a conversation that continued over dinner after we had left campus. Beauty has had a long and significant history in the realm of aesthetics, from Kant to Danto, though beauty has been a topic long before Kant and will long after Danto.
I think that beauty has been over emphasized, both in a definitive and qualitative manner. I have heard it used to determine whether or not an artifact is art: "That's not art, that's ugly." I have also heard beauty used as a criteria for qulaity within art: "This work sucks, it's not beautiful." Both these scenarios do a great disservice to viewer and artist.
What do you think? Where is beauty's proper role in contemplation of the aesthetic?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment