Kant believed that “If we judge objects merely according to concepts, then all representation of beauty is lost.” This is connected to another statement of his, which states that “The satisfaction in the beautiful must depend on the reflection upon the object, leading to any concept (however indefinite), and it is thus distinguished from the pleasant, which rests entirely upon sensation” (p. 100).
In other words, Kant believes that beauty is truly seen when a piece is first viewed with disinterestedness, and only after this is connected with a concept. What I gathered from this is that to look at an art piece and immediately analyze the concept behind it would be to miss the point. To jump immediately into a critique and miss the initial feelings of appreciation would be to miss the point. Art is more than the “concept” of a piece; as Kant discusses, there is a wide range of personal reactions to a piece of work.
When I first read the statements above I thought of pieces like The Last Supper. There is undoubtedly a concept behind the piece, but if that was all one focused on when viewing the painting, much of the beauty would be lost. Its composition, colors, tone, et cetera are all aspects to be admired. To ignore them and only concentrate on its purpose or “concept” would not be doing it justice. It certainly would leave much to be appreciated.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Good observation, Rachelle: "What I gathered from this is that to look at an art piece and immediately analyze the concept behind it would be to miss the point." And the strange part is Kant';s insistance upoin objectivity in subjevtivity, i.e. 'universal satisfaction.'
ReplyDeleteI like your point - that one must take a moment to just focus on the art before considering the concept. I think modern art has gotten too much into analyzing what is behind the art, rather than the art itself.
ReplyDelete