Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
…
4 pages
1 file
I'll give you brief overview, but go light on history of art and art techniques...
University of Malta, 2019
What makes us experience artworks and their aesthetic properties? Can all aesthetic properties be found in all artworks? What aesthetic qualities contribute in evaluating artworks? How do we differentiate between aesthetic value and artistic value and is there any relationship between them? The paper aims to answer these questions by examining influential arguments mainly about aesthetic concepts introduced by Frank Sibley and which were later developed by several other contemporary aestheticians including Robert Stecker, Peter Lamarque and Jerrold Levinson. This paper briefly glances at the historical development of aesthetic properties, from Classical to contemporary times. To avoid speculation and vagueness, the paper proceeds to define some of the aesthetic properties as opposed to non-aesthetic ones and applies them to different literary and visual artworks. Such aesthetic qualities are attributed to a particular experience especially when considering literary works. This aesthetic experience, which includes mainly pleasure, plays an important role in the process of judging and evaluating art. However it can also lead to several non-aesthetic values such as the cognitive value which is discussed in this paper. All these conceptions are open to perennial discussion. However one cannot deny that there is a close connection between aesthetic value and artistic value and that one does not exclude the other, especially in the process of identifying and evaluating artworks.
British Journal of Aesthetics, 2018
If artworks and their aesthetic properties stand in constitutive relationships to historical context and circumstances, so that some understanding of relevant facts is involved in responding to a work, what becomes of the intuitive view that we see artworks and at least some of their aesthetic properties? This question is raised by arguments in both aesthetics and art history for the historical nature of works of art. The paper argues that the answer needs to take philosophy of perception into account. The principal development that has shaped philosophy of perception in the last thirty years-explaining perceptual experience in terms of contents that represent that such-and-such is the case-is directly relevant to key arguments for the historical nature of art because contents can represent complex kinds and properties. Conceptual realism is especially well-suited for explaining perception of artworks and aesthetic properties because it emphasizes that forms of understandingin the sense of capacities, abilities and techniques-are involved in perceptual engagement with individual objects and instances of properties. To make this case, the paper examines influential arguments for the historical nature of art and aesthetic properties by
To appear in D. De Santis, B. Hopkins, C. Majolino (eds), Handbook of Phenomenology (Routledge), 2019
Graph Drawing, 1997
Theory, Culture & Society, 2006
First coined in modernity, the aesthetic is a vague, polysemic and contested concept whose complexities arise from the variety of the ways it has been defined in the history of its theorization, but also in its formative prehistory in theories of art and beauty that preceded its modern coinage. After noting key points of that prehistory, the article traces three major modern tendencies in construing the aesthetic: as a special mode of sensory perception or experience that is relevant to life in general; as a special faculty or exercise of taste focused on judgments of beauty and related qualities such as the sublime; and as a theory (or essential quality) of fine art. The idea of aesthetic disinterestedness is critically examined, and contrasts between the concept of art in Western modernity and in pre-modern and Asian culture are also considered.
In M. A. Runco and S. R. Pritzker (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity, Second Edition, vol. 1 (pp. 24-28). San Diego: Academic Press., 2011
Aesthetics involves judgments of beauty or pleasingness. Narrower discussions focus on fine art and define beauty as pleasingness to the eye or ear. Broader discussions, however, see beauty in the revelation of truth and order not just in art but in any domain. Aesthetic judgments are both subjective and relative. As a result, there is no universal agreement on how observers can recognize beauty when they encounter it. Creativity involves aesthetic properties but goes beyond these to require novelty and effectiveness. Concentration on aesthetic properties of products, especially useful products, expands the definition of creativity and suggests a set of indicators of creativity: Such indicators offer promise of a universal aesthetic of creativity which would not only expand understanding of creativity but would offer perspectives on assessment of creativity, improve communication regarding creativity, and facilitate creativity-oriented teaching and learning activities.
Exploring the Critical Issues of Beauty, 2012
This paper defuses anti-beauty and pro-beauty arguments by offering a more adequate account of artistic beauty. We argue that neither beauty, nor extra-beauty concerns should be discarded as values of art. Therefore, we distinguish artistic beauty from both aesthetic excellence and beauty as such. Hence, when we judge that an artwork is aesthetically valuable, it does not automatically follow that the artwork is beautiful. If artistic beauty is equated with aesthetic excellence then the notion of beauty is stretched almost beyond recognition or many non-beautiful artworks are denied aesthetic value. Moreover, the beauty of an artwork does not plainly coincide with beauty per se. Many artworks can be perceived as beautiful, but this does not automatically entail that the perceived beauty is an aesthetic merit of the artwork, i.e. that it contributes to the artwork's artistic value. Furthermore, if the beauty of an artwork contradicts or diminishes other properties of an artwork, the artwork's beauty counts as an aesthetic demerit. Properly drawing these distinctions is of paramount importance for the following reasons. (1) These distinctions allow us to assign aesthetic excellence to non-beautiful art. There is no need to include non-beautiful art within the realm of beauty in order to judge such artworks as aesthetically valuable. (2) These distinctions help clarifying why not all beauty in art counts as artistic beauty. Beauty that is incidental or contradicts the aims or content of the artwork is not artistic beauty. Thus, surface beauty in art does not necessarily imply artistic beauty or aesthetic merit. (3) Artistic beauty is not the mere representation of a beautiful thing. What is ugly in nature can be beautiful in art. We conclude that these distinctions are useful for assessing the role of beauty and aesthetics in art.
The Extractive Industries and Society, 2017
Archäologische Denkmalpflege 4, 2024
Archéologia, 2024
Biopreservation and Biobanking, 2010
Kastamonu Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 2020
Revista Direito e Práxis, 2024
ASC Series, 2024
Multiple-Choice Examinations in Medicine: A Guide for Examiner and Examinee, 1961
Journal of Defense Resources Management, 2018
International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 2003
Excerptiones iuris. Studies in Honor of André Gouron. …, 2000
Jurnal Pendidikan, 2021
arXiv (Cornell University), 2023
Journal of Banking & Finance, 2007
Journal of Composite Materials, 1982
Queen Mary Journal of Intellectual Property
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 2014
Journal of Physiology-Paris, 1993