> Chris, you write, "The final words of his [i.e. mine, Cheerskep's] previous > post had given me some hope that he > was about to modify that position: > > "I think the answers can shed some light on how what we call > "aesthetics" is incorporated in the actual making or developing of a work." > Alas, I hate losing the credit for giving you some hope, but those were Michael Brady's words, not mine. > > > "With rare prescience, I knew what Cheerskep would reply a few minutes > after I > asked him the question - "what do you think these authors have in common ? > Anything that you would call "aesthetic"?" > > I just knew that he would say "No, these authors do not have anything in > common that I would call "aesthetic" -- but then, I very seldom use that > word,except as a modifier for 'experience'." > > "Cheerskep has always been dead set against attributing special, highly > positive qualities to books, paintings, music and suchB -- only to the > cherished moments of experience he has had with them." > No, no . For example, I'd say the likes of, "I think HAMLET is a terrific play! All in all, for me it's the terrificest of any I've ever read or seen!" But that's not to say every line deserves to be sewn on a lap-pillow. For me, the stuff about the Little Eyases is a yawn. (Bet you can't even remember that passage!)
I know it hasn't "landed" with you guys, but there's a possibility that my speech saying it's a mistake to consider a novel or play a "single" "work of art" just may be unique. I'm less ready to say something like that about a painting, even though in the execution it is somewhat as much a multiplex of acts as a novel. I'm given pause by the perhaps deluded sense that there are some paintings where we can "take it all in" instantly. As for Chris's further ponderings (below), I'd say I enjoy different books for generically different virtues. For example, some guys give pleasure largely from their "style", their "rich and mellifluous" writing. Others for the grip of their story and/or characters. Others for the way they "move" us. Etc. I can be gripped with interest throughout a book without ever reaching the level of "ecstasy" I identify with an a.e. Still others I love for their humor. Now, here's a forum question: Given that some poems ring up an a.e. with a single line, would you say that when we laugh at a hilarious line in a book or play or movie, it is for us an a.e.? If I think about it, my response to lines that have broken me up has been in many ways very like what I call an a.e.. > > And ... now he has told us that he "admires" all but one them (even though > the > admirable ones may or may not have provided him with an aesthetic > experience) > > So --- what has he found so admirable ? > > Surely there are some special qualities that each of them have - and perhaps > if he would begin to list them -- we might find what those qualities have in > common. > ************** Play online games for FREE at Games.com! All of your favorites, no registration required and great graphics b check it out! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1211202682x1200689022/aol?redir= http://www.games.com?ncid=emlcntusgame00000001)
