If it's entirely up to each individual to determined what's good and bad (conduct) then we might as well do away with all laws and let loose wild anarchy. This is what has happened in art, except that the market place in its broadest sense, does narrow the options. Trouble is, the "free-market" mentality of the art market does not ensure quality. It only ensures that some art will be put into that category and most will not. WC
--- On Sun, 11/2/08, armando baeza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: armando baeza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Expertise and aesthetic experience > To: [email protected] > Cc: "armando baeza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Sunday, November 2, 2008, 12:28 PM > Some how ,in my mind , every thing that is considered good > and > bad ,comes under > the umbrella of morality. and every thing that is ugly and > beautiful > comes under the > umbrella of aesthetics. That line is always crossed at > different > points by different > individuals and groups of individual. So,who is to judge > where that > line should be line ? > If we are to evolve to that 'just' point, what will > happen to the > individual. > mando > > On Nov 2, 2008, at 9:15 AM, Michael Brady wrote: > > > On Oct 12, 2008, at 11:52 AM, William Conger wrote: > > > >> My interest is related to morality and whether or > not it has an > >> intrinsic connection to the aesthetic. If so, one > needs to > >> recognize the salient signals of the the moral and > then approach > >> the aesthetic from them. If pornography is > aesthetic in the broad > >> way you mention then I want to know if it's > also moral. > >> Downgrading it to the purient and then to the more > civil tone of > >> erotica doesn't help unless you can tell me > where (and evidenced > >> by what terms "notions") the line is > crossed from ammoral to > >> moral; that is, from unaesthetic to aesthetic. > > > > > > I think you've trapped me with the equivalence of > "moral" and > > "aesthetic." Jean Annouilh has Henry II > observe of Beckett, "I > > think with him, it [morality] is a question of > > aesthetics." [paraphrase] And I've said > elsewhere that art > > moralizes nature, that is, it organizes our sensory > perceptions and > > representations with rules and directives. Morality > (and ethics) is > > a social code that promotes certain behavior and > discourages other. > > > > I do not believe that the aesthetic force or aspect of > art itself > > leads to moral behavior, or the converse. Morality > addresses > > (describes, codifies) right behavior whereas > aesthetics addresses > > good form. (See Maritain on that for a long > explanation of the > > quality of the artwork made by an immoral maker.) In > fact, I do not > > believe that as a necessary condition, there is a > didactic or > > ennobling end for art, beyond its own high > quality--although art > > has often, even usually, been made with a social > purpose in mind. > > Most art that I've seen is of the "oh, look > at this" kind, rather > > than "this is how you should [should not] > live." > > > > Pornography is specifically sexual, about sexual > arousal and > > portrayals. The immorality of pornography, according > to most > > doctrinal and even therapeutic commentators, is that > it exalts > > selfish sexual gratification above the shared > experience of sexual > > embrace with another person. Not merely that it's > fruitless > > (masturbation), but that it is devoid of human love > for a partner. > > (This doesn't take into account the moral context > of the actors and > > producers of the porn films and pictures, just the > watcher. Their > > moral state is a separate issue about instrumentality, > the proper > > ends of a behavior, and the perverting of those ends.) > > > > Visual perceptions have a strong power to bypass the > scrutiny of > > verbal intelligence and imprint a memory that is hard > to reshape. > > Moreover, some sights (visual perceptions) are > profoundly strong > > and attractive, as are smells, tastes, touches, and > sounds. These > > sensations are primordial and almost impossible to > disempower. It > > is a significant property of the "arts" that > they are able to > > deceive the senses by simulation. Pictures resemble > their models to > > one degree or other (ask the crow in the story of > Zeuxis and > > Parrhasius). > > > > The fear of images that Puritans and other iconoclasts > feared > > images because the believed that art beguiles with its > fine > > appearances and leads innocents away from virtue. The > response to > > those outbreaks of iconoclasm was the > counter-assertion that art > > leads the illiterate and others to truth by way of > depicting noble > > and high moral scenes. Pope Gregory the Great makes > just that > > argument, as recorded in Bede. And the reason Plato > wanted to > > prohibit artists in the Republic was that art was a > deceit; > > Socrates was condemned for scandalizing the youth by > promoting > > wrong ways of thinking. > > > > In the cultural history of the Christian West, the > Counter- > > Reformation art fought the Protestant spirit with > grand works that > > drew in the faithful with awe, imperiousness, and > blandishments. It > > was the beginning of propaganda (literally: the > Catholic church > > established the Congretatio de Propaganda Fide, the > Congregation > > for the Propagation of the Faith), although the > practice of using > > images, songs, constructions, sculptures, spectacle, > to elevate the > > leader before the public goes back into time > immemorial. > > > > Thus, art--aesthetics--can be (is) subservient to > morality. > > > > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | > > Michael Brady > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
