Comments

I agree with the idea, but not the wording. I don't think you were wrong about music any more than Ms. Scarry was wrong about palm trees. We change as we age and our circumstances develop. What was once ugly or uninteresting can become beautiful to us as our lives develop. This doesn't mean we were wrong before, just that we were different. You may get to a point in your life when you once again do not appreciate Bach. That doesn't mean you will be wrong or that you are wrong now, just changing.

Posted by Mike at April 1, 2005 3:04 PM

Mike, yes, my tastes may again change. But I think Scarry 's words were precise: I was discovering something that was in Bach's music that I hadn't heard before. At some point I may find what I now know is there to be tedious, or grating, or superficial, but Scarry is right: In not seeing what was in Bach, I was making a mistake.

That's why, in my opinion, good art criticism isn't simply subjective. It enables you to see what's there, even if you don't respond to it the way the critic suggests. I loved Rembrandt's Eyes by Simon Schama for just that reason: He got me to see—literally—what I had previously been blind to...a type of mis-taking.

Posted by David Weinberger at April 1, 2005 3:29 PM

The pursuit of truth and beauty is a sphere of activity in which we are permitted to remain children all our lives.
--Albert Einstein

The lover knows much more about absolute good and universal beauty than logician or theologian, unless the latter, too, be lovers in disguise.
--George Santayana (1863-1952)

Beauty of style and harmony and grace and good rhythm depend on Simplicity.
--Plato

Posted by Sean at April 1, 2005 3:32 PM

We've had a good deal of trouble with saying that someone who doesn't appreciate opera, for instance, is making a mistake. It feels harshly judgmental to our egalitarian ears. But, I believe it to be true. The mis-take is that of not appreciating the access to the richness of human experience that is uniquely captured in opera. We may gain access to that richness at another time (I didn't "get opera" until I was 30) through life changes. The richness, however, was always there. It was just that we couldn't see it. Kind of like the sun at night.

Posted by Tom Guarriello at April 1, 2005 3:51 PM

Let us not forget that Ms. Scarry's theses have more to do with the relationship between beauty and truth and how this compels (or should compel) us to actions of social justice and improvement. The first part of the book is about beauty and being wrong. The second part is about beauty and being fair.

Posted by Mike at April 1, 2005 4:10 PM

I find Beauty it's just one part of the aesthetic experience, it surely depends on personal backgrounds, preferences, etc, but there are other determinant factors, mainly social conventions we don't even stop to think about.

Also there are more things than just beauty when it comes to appreciating something, like the grace, the sublime...and what about moral beauty? is not that also a pleasure?

I believe indeed that understanding something, like Art, opens a whole new dimension of dialogue between the person and the piece of art that can lead the individual to spiritual, moral or intellectual heights. Missing this could be considered as a mistake or just ignorance...

Posted by Omara at April 1, 2005 7:31 PM

I agree and don't. I like the idea of resonance. Some music, art, beauty will resonate at times and will not at others. What is IT resonating with? With our experiences. With our emotional state. With our awareness at the time.

Often we are more sensitive in times of crisis and pain (such as a loved one dying). Certain things will resonate at those times that will not at others.

I wouldnt categorize this as right or wrong. There's no need to impose a dichotomous judgement on it. The world/existence/etc. bombards us with an infinite range of stimuli. All of it is beautiful when viewed from a deeply sensitive state... (yes, even that which is considered painful and horrible).

For example, if you are in an enraged state you may very well find the Sex Pistols or Rage Against The Machine to be "beautiful". If you are bathed in LSD, you will find all sorts of odd things to be beautiful.

Its the inner experience, rather than the outer "thing", that defines the experience.

Posted by AJ Hoge at April 2, 2005 1:48 AM

Although I love the passion and sentiment it seems rather an overblown idea!

If you don't like something it's ugly that IS the truth for that moment and that person.

It's great if you can, either conciously or unconciously, open your mind and find beauty where there was none before and this will enrich your life. Then the object will become beautiful and that IS the truth at that moment for that person.

I like photography and I often spend my time commuting on the train looking out of the window for interesting patterns and shapes - it's a great mental exercise (and pretty good stress relief too!)

Posted by PaulH at April 2, 2005 5:47 AM

If beauty and art are only a matters of taste and what resonates and what happens in us, then art and truth are essentially distinct, which seems to me to miss turn art into nothing but good feelings. Of course, we respond differently, and our response matters, and we will never and should never completely agree about art: That Bach means a lot to me absolutely doesn't mean that he should mean a lot to you. And vice versa.

Having said all that, I think the idea that beauty/art is purely subjective downplays art and doesn't capture our experience of it. We come to appreciate many artworks by having someone else point out what's there in it. "See how Titian edges the side of that object with a single stroke of pure white?" "Listen and you can hear the theme return, except this time it ends on a minor note." "See how David looks worried and overwhelmed? A Biblical hero had never looked so human -- a new conception of what it means to be a person, and a new idea of our relation to God." "Notice that the artistry of the house is in its becoming almost invisible in its landscape." The work of the art teacher or critic (whether it's a guide, a professor, a writer or your parents) is to show us what's there, finding the beauty in the work.

That certainly doesn't mean that now our hearts are going to leap at the artwork; we respond subjectively. But we are responding to a beauty that's there independent of our response. That's the only way we could have the experience of learning to see/hear/taste art.

Maybe I'm wrong about this. Wouldn't be the first time. But even so, the idea that beauty is nothing but our response to beauty seems to me to miss an important part of our experience.

Posted by David Weinberger at April 2, 2005 9:22 AM

David, what an interesting response. My first reaction was to search for a rebuttal but I think we are both right, but at different levels.

At a certain level, art is simply resonance with emotion. Im pissed off... pop in a Rage Against the Machine CD... and it seems sublime, powerful,.. even beautiful. This is a kind of art... the type we encounter most often.

But I think I understand what you are getting at. Your response reminds me of Aldous Huxley's. He felt that the deepest "art" was more than personal-- it was transcendent... something that pointed to truths, powers, realities that are eternal. You can put a religious word on it such as Tao/Suchness/Godhead... but "beauty" & "truth" serve just as well.

To "get" that type of art, you have to awaken to an awareness far wider/deeper than the everyday, mundane mindset. Tragedy can often cause such an awakening.. as can any crisis. "Meditation" can cause it. Certain plants/drugs can facilitate it. Perhaps even a comment from another person can do so.

Regardless of the cause, we must be in a receptive state to appreciate such art. Otherwise it is lost on us.

This type of art is rare... and it does indeed point to eternal truths. I agree with you.

Posted by AJ Hoge at April 4, 2005 5:39 AM

Hi David.

A beautiful and personal story. And it looks/feels like a spiritual experience of the first order.

Is there more in art than subjective interpretations? Is there such thing as absolute beauty? Something that all the art only circles around and which sometimes reveals itself in the fragments of the laws of a higher beauty …
Are we all connected in beauty? viagra in the states

Or is there such a thing as absolute wisdom that shines through some of the greatest scientific publications of all time…. Connected in wisdom?

Or does our life on earth make sense? Do we find some traces of a higher plan in our every days, and are we possibly all connected in godly love?
…

So, are you wrong about your experience and conclusions, you ask.
As we know with these things: the existence of something higher than our individuality can neither be proved, nor can it be proved that something higher does not exist.
And therefore: it exists.
(for those who see, hear, believe)

Posted by jens at April 4, 2005 7:02 AM

Your experience reminds me of what T.S. Eliot said:
"The end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time." I truly enjoyed your story.

Posted by Mona at April 14, 2005 12:13 PM viagra overnight order