Well, let's take a look at Santayana on this topic: In Reason in Art, "The Basis of Art" Santayana writes: ...and the notable aesthetic value which some works of art possess, for reasons flowing for the most part out of their mortal significance, is one of the satisfactions which art offers..." Later: "for neither in the history of art nor in a rational estimate of its value can the aesthetic function of things be divorced from the practical and the moral".
It seems the Santayana is providing a practical function to art, belonging to its aesthetic character in some essential way and this practical function is, or ought to be, moral. It should "...to increase man's comfort, knowledge, and delight". Too old fashioned? Too dreamily idealistic for our time? WC --- On Sun, 1/4/09, Michael Brady <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Michael Brady <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Malcolm Gladwell > To: [email protected] > Date: Sunday, January 4, 2009, 10:40 AM > On Jan 4, 2009, at 10:47 AM, William Conger wrote: > > > Which brings us back to Miller's topic re Nazi > art. Do we only > > judge the artists' gifts and talents in assessing > their art or do > > we also include morality in the mix? A tough > question, made tougher > > by any look at historical context for so much art, but > can the moral > > intent issue be ignored? > > > What are the moral calibrations? > > Usually, in judging or appreciating artworks, man non-moral > criteria > are used (quality, craftsmanship, materials, etc.) and few > moral ones. > In fact, such questions as "Does the work have an > ennobling > [pernicious, laudatory, despicable] effect?" seem to > occur either at > the outset of the evaluating or at the end. "Geez, > what a repulsively > jingoistic picture. End of story. " or "All in > all, it's a tour de > force, and it shows us the importance of > ____________." > > Related to an outright moral evaluation of a work is the > claim that > the work addresses or embodies a great theme. This is > frequently heard > in comments about Shakespeare ("Besides the brilliance > of his plays, > he touched on timeless themes of great human reach."), > for example. > > Moral criteria do not overlap or subsume any of the > aesthetic criteria > (unless the aesthetic criteria specifically include > something about > the moral purposefulness of the work), so the moral > judgment of a work > is basically independent of it aesthetic merit. > > However, often aesthetic criteria do encompass the moral, > in the case > of artificial, extraneous, or otherwise external sentiment > of one kind > or another; such as the treacly sentimentality of > Kinkade-genre images > (Timberlake, the big-eyed children, Bob Ross and the > "happy trees," > Simbari, etc.); Soviet-style workers' paradise posters; > religious or > patriotic music and images; even pornography. > > > > > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | > Michael Brady > [email protected]
