Cheerskep.
 I definitely feel there is similar a.e. in all humans in our
experiences with nature,
But in regards A,E's from man made creative
expressions in Art /Music / Words/ etc,
i feel that it all comes from personal
experiences with it and finding like minds that
agree. . Some how we admire
those that succeed  and reject those that fail as the
final factor that
separates the good from bad, as if that directs us to better and better.
 
Ab
________________________________
 From:[email protected]" <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Monday, March 12, 2012 8:38 AM
Subject:
 
In a message dated 3/12/12 4:39:25 AM, [email protected] writes:


>
Do you feel that an a.e. is supposed to be cathartic, i.e., provide a 
> kind
> of purge?
> 
> In truth, no, though I concede there seems to be an element
of "readiness" 
involved; e.g. satiety, exhaustion, can play a part. Satiety
can certainly 
be a factor in matters of sex, but to address this a bit more
clearly, I 
might shift the comparison of "pleasures" from sexual to
gustatory. 

One can sit down to a table covered with a variety of
comestibles. Some of 
the edibles "taste better" than others. Indeed, some of
them occasion a 
taste that calls for a superlative adjective. "This veal dish
tastes exquisite!" 
But when you've eaten your full, the taste-pleasure
weakens, you've had 
"enough". The readiness, the
 possibility, for gustatory
pleasure
 diminishes as 
the taste-receptors in the palate are "exhausted".
Something comparable 
occurs if I try to read poetry for hours on end, or
spend half a day at the 
Metropolitan Museum of art.  

Still, I'm not
inclined to call gustatory pleasure 'cathartic' or 
'purgative'   the way one
might characterize the feeling of orgasm. 

In response to Conlin's good
posting, I add this. Without "defining" 
consciousness, I can say I've never
been aware of confusing a palatal experience 
with a sexual experience. 
Similarly, when I've had an "aesthetic 
experience", I've been convinced this
feeling was a genus distinctly different from 
sexual or palatal. As I stood
in front of one of Van Gogh's SUNFLOWERS     in 
the Kroller-Muller Museum,
the whelming sensation was of a "kind" different 
from those other two. And
when I first had an aesthetic experience from 
poetry (from a poem by
Dickinson and a poem by Auden, both on the same night) I 
knew this feeling
was different from anything I could remember from my 
earlier reading life.
(And this was after college where I'd read much poetry in 
fulfilling academic
assignments. I concede I was a very slow starter.)

This is not to deny that
my aesthetic experiences were subject to ranges: 
ranges in power, and ranges
in genre sources. Still, though experiences from 
poetry, music, paintings et
al were distinct, I've had no hesitation in 
maintaining they have been of a
"kind" different from sexual, palatal, etc.  
Moreover, I've been convinced
that   certain "out of the studio" daily-life  
experiences were yielding an
aesthetic experience: on a sporting field, a 
landscape in Italy and
California, on television as I watched the unfolding of 
a "real life" drama.
There is obviously much more to say, but I'll save some of it for
 my next
posting, more completely devoted to Conlin's posting.  

(One last remark, in
reponse to something Joseph (Artsy6) asked: The late 
piano concertos of
Mozart provided some of his "best moments". And passages 
in some of the
operas. To show I'm not an undiscriminating pushover for 
anything Mozartian,
I report that, for me, IDOMENEO provided only three hours of 
tedium.

Reply via email to