[EMAIL PROTECTED] cites an article in the Financial Express. The text of the article appears to be an extract -- from a book published in India -- about the usefulness of making a product both utilitarian and "attractive". Again, the ingenuity of aesthete8 in finding and vetting these things amazes me. A8 asks about the text of the article:
> Does that define an "aesthetic experience"? > Here is a pertinent excerpt from the article: "When one looks at a product, one finds that it has two characteristics which are exogenous variablesbone, the hedonic value of a product, which is defined as bthe level of pleasure that the product or service is capable of giving to the average consumerb, and the other, the utilitarian value of a product, which is defined as the level of usefulness --- "If one studies the definition of aesthetics in the marketplace, then aesthetics, to some extent, may be defined as the study of the buyerbs cognition, affective and behavioural response to media, entertainment and arts. The aesthetic experience involves attending to, perceiving and appreciating an object with regard to whatever utilitarian function it might perform. Starting from the Greek ideas of structural order to the Gestalt psychology of the principle of unity, many functional products have gained competitive advantage by satisfying aesthetic as well as utilitarian needs, which are functional and non-functional." Strangely, the would-be somewhat-defining line for an a.e. ignores the "hedonic" and focuses on the "utilitarian": "The aesthetic experience involves attending to, perceiving and appreciating an object with regard to whatever utilitarian function it might perform." "Involves' is usually a waffling word. They should have said 'comprises', perhaps. But even then the line is little more than a truism. For that matter, so is their would-be definition of "aesthetics" (in the marketplace): "aesthetics in the marketplace to some extent may be defined as the study of the buyerbs cognition, affective and behavioural response to media ---" Instead of the waffling word 'involves', the waffling words heere are "to some extent". In sum, the answer to Aesthete8's question is "No." IN the end the whole article is vacuous as hell. (I'll spare listers a Cheerskep ramble about the variety of notions behind the use of the word 'definition'.) ************** Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)
