#5 - Beauty

In this series of posts I attempt to express my views on art as they have been influenced by the philosophers I have studied. Although many of the ideas are directly connected to the ideas of these philosophers, it is often the case that my use of their concept is not quite in harmony with what they were originally claiming. One post each day will continue the discussion.
Beauty has often been discussed as an important element of successful art. Although beauty is sometimes viewed as being connected to revealing truth, I find it more useful to distinguish beauty as a separate and formal characteristic of a work of art. I believe the presence of beauty in an artwork can be an instance of truth by itself, but I don’t think that every communication of truth is necessarily beautiful. Kant’s discussion of the sublime is a good example of a potential communication of truth that isn’t beautiful. Beauty can enhance an artwork but is not necessary for the work to be successful in revealing truth. The simplest way to view beauty is to think of it as the pleasing visual quality of an image. Kant says beauty is simply our mental response to something that produces that satisfaction. Although Kant views beauty as disinterested satisfaction, I have not been able to leave the idea that beauty is relative to the viewer as proposed by Hume. Through discussion and critique I have been able to see beauty in places where I hadn’t before. I’ve also had times where something that once seemed beautiful has ceased to produce the satisfaction. It is my perception and not the objects that changed in these cases. But there do seem to be trends, if not constants, in the classification of beautiful things. Particularly these are apparent in social circles. I think the way beauty is perceived by a man’s culture, family, or friends is a big influence on that man’s perception of beauty.

Continued in the next post...