The aesthetic ideal is always a personal thing first, then it may also be something in common with another person or more, but cannot be easily communicated with words, like the taste from amount of sugar in your coffee. AB On Aug 31, 2012, at 11:49 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> Another thing about the phrase 'aesthetic ideal'. As I said, when I hear > it, I conjure at least three different sorts of notions that the speaker might > have in mind: the creator's guide and goal; a contemplator's guide to > searching for and "appreciating"the best; and a work, a particular object that's > an ideal to try to match. > > It now also occurs to me, different notions would come to the minds of > people involved with different genres. A theater goer wouldn't have the same > "ideal guide" notions as a poet or an architect. > > Even within a genre they wouldn't be the same. Aristotle's parsing of the > ideal tragedy (and therefore tragedian's guide, etc.) would not be called > anyone's "aesthetic ideal" for a comedy, etc. > > I repeat that, without a lot of qualification, no lister can start talking > about "aesthetic ideal" and be justified in thinking everyone else knows > what he's "trying to say". > > I know, and regret, it bugs the hell out of many listers as I constantly > badger for clarity on this forum. And I sense some listers are even bugged in > small part because occasionally it's evident I've espied some distinction > they did not. Please accept it this way: I'm sure every single lister can do > various things better than I. That's not mealy-mouthed baloney: I believe it. > But I also believe that because of my training and my bent of mind, I'm > better at philosophy of language, mind and ontology than most of the listers. > Don't bloody hold it against me -- I certainly don't hold it against > listers who regularly reveal to me things about their art that I didn't know, > reveal things they can do I know I could never do. Smart ass though I am, I > love having dinner with people like that.
