Criterion Of Beauty by Lyra Brenyl People from all walks of life has its own tastes when it comes to their judgement of beauty and art; be it in paintings, photographs, sketches, music, architecture, film and literature, almost being a part of our everyday lives. Art- being said that it comprises beauty and pleasure has its own share of downsides too, -criticisms. Most criticisms are meant to be done constructively, or shall we call it constructive criticism. Thus, its interpretations can be both judged by personal opinions or be developed from a high degree of tastes. It has been categorized as either Subjective or Objective; making it a familiar problem discussed widely in fields of HUMANITIES and aesthetics. Does subjectivity holds more value than that of an objective one? How can such art be called beautiful and pleasurable? Which of which should be called real beauty? All viewers have different standards of taste. The most popular and most accepted was the subjective form of art, a work of a genius that inspires the artist to show his hidden face through his works. These are works influenced by personal feelings, tastes, experiences, states and opinions. It is more dependent on an individual’s perception of beauty for its innate existence. It is something the senses could easily judge, that of which is easily appreciated. A theory that describes to an individual thinking which is always subject to sensations, attributes, and emotions. A subjective judgement asserts that all ideas and criticisms starts with their sense data which is often called “egocentric predicament”, something that is affirmed or denied concerning an argument of a certain subject, wherein the thinking disregards what others think or feel; in such case there is no escape. It has always been a solipsist’s point of view, since such feelings can only be known to oneself. However, it admits an inferential knowledge of other minds, thus it holds value private and relative knowledge. This form of art has always made its way to mainstream media, the pop culture of comical or dramatic film, trance rhythmic and love songs. The mentioned themes had always been a popular choice because of matters PEOPLE see themselves or people relate to it because of personal attachments. For them, its art is a promise of happiness. If reading romance novels, watching drama makes you swoon over the characters and story, most likely you find pleasure in its subjectivity. On the other hand there is the objective form. These are art that represents facts not influenced by feelings, not even dependent on the mind for existence. It always appeals at sophistication, or have been made and developed at a high degree, providing excellence to viewers with complicated or educated aesthetic tastes, or even people who gets pleasure through beauty regardless of how they feel about it, and regardless its relativity to their personal state. During the old times, all it takes is a person knowledgeable about the nature and appreciation of beauty or an aesthetician to provide acceptable criticism for us to understand such art; as Schiller coins it “aesthetic education”. For most instances, these are the kind of art that pop culture would find it either too complicated to appreciate, or too uncommon that they haven’t encountered such in reality; or worst, is being ditched as ugly. Sometimes, some would call it “Sublime”, which aspires admiration for its supremacy and unparalleled form. Its excellence and grandeur. Was meant to be admired only by the REFINED one, or the ones that has the heart for the sublime and Avant garde. Most of these kind of art have difficulty getting acceptance and appreciation from the socially accepted categories, mostly because of its unparalleled substance, often gets negative reactions from viewers, sometimes from fellow artists. Often these facts aren’t enough to describe and characterize such art, objectively made out of norm, quiet experimental. As some would say, it takes an intelligent man to invent something out of nothing. And these are regardless of their emotions or admiration for its supremacy and unparalleled form. Its beauty emanates from an artist’s submission to the objective aesthetic that governs it, therefore beyond subjectivity of taste. If you enjoyed viewing Picasso’s paintings, or that of Tolstoy’s literature relaxes you, it is probably because you find pleasure objectively. Both subjective and objective beauty owes its special value, for it is made with effort and time; still serves pleasure to both audiences. They just differ in tastes and knowledge. Art has no exact science of the beautiful and pleasurable, it just makes us more HUMAN with own rational freedom. I know some would think of food. Food is generally pleasurable, it may lack subjects for beauty since we all eat it in any form regardless of how they look as long as we find it delicious. These are the common pleasures of life, the “Comfort Food”. Regardless of its set up, they could still be eaten, but of course it would also be fun to sometimes eat food artistically prepared. But that’s not necessary. Like art, the taste only matters, then it is enjoyable and pleasurable. “There is beauty by which all things are beautiful” -Plato
Posted on: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 02:38:08 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015