It's true that Manet's Olympia caused something of a scandal in 1863 but we need to keep in mind that the mid 19C was when the audiences for art were changing from the special class of elites to the emerging middle class. The new audiences were at first even more elitist than those whosze tastes they emulated. So if Manet seemed to downgrade the refined aetheticism of the former elitists he also enraged the emerging audiences even though his work was a direct appeal to "real life, naturalism, and the common man. This is one of the ironies of modernism. It was aimed at the newly emerging working-middle class but their values imitated an effete ruling class. Ingres was not nearly as salacious as many other salon artists who openly appealed to the male gaze searching for erotica masquerading as art. Manet was blunt in his pictorialism and his painterly surfaces are raw. Ingres was too abstract to be erotic. His figures may be appealing but they are anatomically twisted. He was more interested in linear rhythm than in anatomic erotics. With all that said, there is a huge difference between porn and art, maybe. Picasso made amazing pornographic art and he proved that the more art it is the less porn it is. Nowadays many artists try to erase any distinctions between art and everyday life and to prove it they do a lot of pornographic work and present it in art contexts. But this does not necessarily involve aesthetics. Aesthetics may not require art and vice versa.
WC --- On Sat, 10/11/08, GEOFF CREALOCK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: GEOFF CREALOCK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Expertise and aesthetic experience > To: [email protected] > Date: Saturday, October 11, 2008, 5:13 PM > Good point, William. I would object to viewing porn being an > aesthetic > experience. And then we would need to decide if > "Olympia" (Manet) or some > works by Ingres would qualify as aesthetic. I suppose we > would be back to > your elite, informed experts (to which I object) as the > arbiters of > aesthetici objects. Perhaps someone else can carry the > discussion forward on > this point. > Geoff C > > > >From: William Conger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: [email protected] > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: Re: Expertise and aesthetic experience > >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 13:41:23 -0700 (PDT) > > > >So does porn qualify re aesthetic experience? > >WC > > > > > >--- On Sat, 10/11/08, GEOFF CREALOCK > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > From: GEOFF CREALOCK > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Subject: Re: Expertise and aesthetic experience > > > To: [email protected] > > > Date: Saturday, October 11, 2008, 3:18 PM > > > Here is my "vague summary" definition > of > > > "aesthetic experience" > > > (idiosyncratic though it may be): a satisfying or > > > significantly pleasurable > > > response, sustantially but not necessarily solely > > > affective, to a stimulus > > > (painting, poem, play, photograph or natural > event - add > > > your own > > > favourite). > > > I agree that definition is difficult, but that is > not, for > > > me, a reason to > > > make no effort. (Look at the fine work of > President Bush to > > > manage national > > > debt.) > > > Geoff C > > > > > > > > > >From: William Conger > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >Reply-To: [email protected] > > > >To: [email protected] > > > >Subject: Re: Expertise and aesthetic > experience > > > >Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 08:27:27 -0700 (PDT) > > > > > > > >Most philosophers say that whatever the > aesthetic > > > "experience" is, it > > > >cannot be fully explicated because to do that > is to > > > describe it in terms > > > >separate from the experience. Experience is > a flow, a > > > continuum, always > > > >mixed with a variety of feelings and memories > in > > > addition to the moment at > > > >hand. How is it possible to isolate "an > > > experience" except in vague > > > >summary? Thus I think the aesthetic > experience, a > > > faulty term, is > > > >ineffable. In fact, I suspect we could say > the same > > > about any sort of > > > >experience whatsoever. We need to use a > language to > > > reconstruct the > > > >presumed experience and that has its own > experiental or > > > even aesthetic > > > >evocative and therefore constructive aspects. > In > > > short, the word we use to > > > >describe our experience is also an experience > and thus > > > has its own defining > > > >impact. > > > > > > > >Because no experience can be replicated by a > language I > > > frankly have no > > > >idea what an aesthetic experience is. Some > episodes of > > > my ongoing > > > >experiental life seem to be more surprising > and > > > fascinating, and remind me > > > >of the "oceanic" metaphor, like out > of body > > > fantasies, but, really, nothing > > > >is adequately both necessary and sufficient > to describe > > > any experience > > > >without making it anew, and false. > > > > > > > >I am one who answered in the affirmative > regarding the > > > "aesthetic" benefit > > > >of learning from critics. I use the word > critic > > > expansively here, and > > > >apply it a range of writers from writers like > > > Baudelaire to art scholars > > > >like TJ Clark, among hundreds of others. > Why? These > > > people have given me > > > >deeper access to art, enabling me to > experience it far > > > more fully than I > > > >might have otherwise. Sometimes, their prose > alone is > > > so enlightening that > > > >it becomes fused, as it were, with the > artworks they > > > discuss. And isn't > > > >art something that should attract and reflect > the > > > distilled experiences > > > >expressed by its audiences? When it begins > life, an > > > artwork is empty, or > > > >meaningless, as all things are, and attains > vitality > > > through the content > > > >its audiences create and vicariously extend > to it. > > > > > > > >WC > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >--- On Sat, 10/11/08, Chris Miller > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: Chris Miller > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > Subject: Re: Expertise and aesthetic > experience > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > Date: Saturday, October 11, 2008, 9:05 > AM > > > > > As Derek once asked, "What *is* an > > > "aesthetic > > > > > experience"?" --- and perhaps > > > > > not everyone here would say that they
