you know when you get out of the cinema and you feel high and drunk or is it just me
wanna read a little bit of the essay i’m doing about john berger?
Aesthetics, Berger implores, is the most essential pretentiousness a work of art can have. Using the words of John Berger, let us define aesthetics: “The problem is that you can’t talk about aesthetics without talking about the principle of hope and the existence of evil” (Berger 5). This would of course imply that aesthetics is a representative entity that is attached to all works and is thus symbolic on the proverbial scale between good, evil, and grey. This is untrue. We must look further into Berger’s own pretentiousness to see that aesthetics is when “[we] isolate the qualities of the white bird which provoke an aesthetic emotion” (Berger 7). This only brings us deeper into aesthetic emotion which is actually a misnomer and a coined phrase that Berger chooses not to explicitly define. “The aesthetic emotion we feel…is a derivative of the emotion we feel before nature [that is] the white bird is an attempt to translate a message received from a real bird” (Berger 8). Berger finds that nature is a set type of “things that were created”. Aesthetic emotion is allowing oneself to experience what the creator felt when creating. Art, by extension, is not the imitation of nature, rather, the organized value of aesthetic emotions that represent a creation; the artist is God in his realm as we are godly in our minds. This extends into artistic value and what it means to us. Berger is an art critic. His job, at its most reductive point of view, is to try and read people’s minds. Aesthetic emotion and art is just that, trying to read the mind of the creator. The critic’s job, thereafter, is to judge how accurately this art has represented the aesthetic emotion behind the initial creation. What Berger leaves out – rather implies to the reader – is that the critic is an artist himself and begins to determine the aesthetic emotion of the art at hand, that the art is a creation and the artist, its creator. This makes the critic and artist the same type of person in theory; they both try and beguile an audience into thinking they are right.
is it ok?
i’m not allowed to by on tumblr becaause StayFocused is mean!!!