Beauty (Amelia Jones Article)
Archaic Ideals of Beauty
In the article “Every man knows where and how beauty gives him pleasure” Beauty Discourse and the Logic of Aesthetics Amelia Jones describes a warped sense of beauty held by figures with a sort of authoritarian persona. I would have to agree with Amelia’s argument that the definition of beauty cannot be the same amongst everyone due to a social construct.
The title of the article is a John Ruskin quote. Ruskin’s quote is specifically chosen because it is a dual gesture. His quote acknowledges that beauty is subjective by stating “Every man knows…(pg 215).” While at the same time Ruskin callously naturalizes the definition of beauty. Throughout the piece Jones points out the theories of the men she referenced (Immanuel Kant, Johann Winkelmann, John Ruskin) contradict each other. Each theory just like Ruskin’s claims an authoritarian persona as if the author speaking/ writing it is correct in their definition of beauty and no one else is. Jones points out many instances when the theories do not apply to the beholder of the beauty. Immanuel Kant says art must be “free from all constraints of chosen rules as if it were a product of mere nature…(pg 224).” Immanuel’s idea of what is beauty is almost free from social construct but still implies disregard for what cannot be viewed under his terms. Jones explains all these theories declare an arbiter of the author or a person whose views have great influence over social behaviors.
When reading this writing I thought of many instances where pieces of art work heavily depend upon the viewer thinking about rules, events, politics, triumph and tyranny. I think great underlying meaning can contribute to beauty. Art work can afford an experience to viewers which is important to acknowledge. It is difficult to look at images and be completely disconnected. Rather as viewers we make connections to that imagery with things that have been previously seen, heard or experienced. As art has developed over time it seems it has become more important for pieces to have a visual language. Different kinds of art also imply a visual language more than others. In the 21st century there are many different art forms existing all at once and feeding off each other as well. Being completely detached from the beholding object also seems to dramatically give it less value as if the viewer does not care and most of the time we look things over because we are fascinated with them.
Keith Haring (Untitled 1982)
Shown above is a 20th century piece of work done by subway artist Keith Haring who also suffered from aids. Keith’s drawings are a fine example of imagery that is difficult to separate from politics, societal normalities, religion, triumph and tyranny. When looking at his pieces you are forced to make connections. Examples like this further support Amelia’s claim to the archaic ideals of the referenced theories. The authority of men’s influence is the most archaic ideal of them all. Kant’s, Winkelmann’s, and Ruskin’s implications of beauty cannot always be applied and generally are not in the present day due to art being a form of speaking out and breaking societal norms.
Work Cited
Jones, Amelia. “Every man knows where and how beauty gives him pleasure...Beauty Discourse and the Logic of Aesthetics.” Aesthetic Judgement and thePublic Sphere. 2002. Print. Accessed 31 August 2021.
https://www.haring.com/!/year/1982
Hey Cayton! This post flowed very well, you have a great structure working between everything and it really made me want to continue reading. You connected your photograph to the reading very well and added a lot of your own details which is amazing. Do you think there are other examples of Haring's work that also fall into this subject? Overall this piece was great, maybe a little more to the conclusion though. The end felt a bit abrupt but other than that great writing!
ReplyDeleteThank you India! I think there is works Haring did that could fall into the theories of the men Jone's referenced. Some of his works are pretty ambiguous. The way he created his works: drawing on black sheets of paper used to cover old ads on the subway walls was not exactly legal. A few times he got caught making his drawings. His process doesn't exactly fall into the ideals referenced in Jones's piece because his art was a rebellious act although some displayed more social turmoil than others. His art work would most likely have been shunned by the men Jone's referenced.
DeleteThank you India! I think there is works Haring did that could fall into the theories of the men Jone's referenced. Some of his works are pretty ambiguous. The way he created his works: drawing on black sheets of paper used to cover old ads on the subway walls was not exactly legal. A few times he got caught making his drawings. His process doesn't exactly fall into the ideals referenced in Jones's piece because his art was a rebellious act although some displayed more social turmoil than others. His art work would most likely have been shunned by the men Jone's referenced.
DeleteThank you India! I think there is works Haring did that could fall into the theories of the men Jone's referenced. Some of his works are pretty ambiguous. The way he created his works: drawing on black sheets of paper used to cover old ads on the subway walls was not exactly legal. A few times he got caught making his drawings. His process doesn't exactly fall into the ideals referenced in Jones's piece because his art was a rebellious act although some displayed more social turmoil than others. His art work would most likely have been shunned by the men Jone's referenced.
DeleteThank you India! I think there is works Haring did that could fall into the theories of the men Jone's referenced. Some of his works are pretty ambiguous. The way he created his works: drawing on black sheets of paper used to cover old ads on the subway walls was not exactly legal. A few times he got caught making his drawings. His process doesn't exactly fall into the ideals referenced in Jones's piece because his art was a rebellious act although some displayed more social turmoil than others. His art work would most likely have been shunned by the men Jone's referenced.
DeleteThank you India! I think there is works Haring did that could fall into the theories of the men Jone's referenced. Some of his works are pretty ambiguous. The way he created his works: drawing on black sheets of paper used to cover old ads on the subway walls was not exactly legal. A few times he got caught making his drawings. His process doesn't exactly fall into the ideals referenced in Jones's piece because his art was a rebellious act although some displayed more social turmoil than others. His art work would most likely have been shunned by the men Jone's referenced.
DeleteThank you India! I think there is works Haring did that could fall into the theories of the men Jone's referenced. Some of his works are pretty ambiguous. The way he created his works: drawing on black sheets of paper used to cover old ads on the subway walls was not exactly legal. A few times he got caught making his drawings. His process doesn't exactly fall into the ideals referenced in Jones's piece because his art was a rebellious act although some displayed more social turmoil than others. His art work would most likely have been shunned by the men Jone's referenced.
DeleteThank you India! I think there is works Haring did that could fall into the theories of the men Jone's referenced. Some of his works are pretty ambiguous. The way he created his works: drawing on black sheets of paper used to cover old ads on the subway walls was not exactly legal. A few times he got caught making his drawings. His process doesn't exactly fall into the ideals referenced in Jones's piece because his art was a rebellious act although some displayed more social turmoil than others. His art work would most likely have been shunned by the men Jone's referenced.
DeleteHi cayton! Your blog post was extremley seamless and it appears as if you have a very good grasp on what the reading is stating and your connection you have to it! I loved how you including Haring's artwork it is a iconic brand as of recently, and the way the original meaning has been taken and flipped to a mindless design of fun for this generation could be a good example of how we can view work in a uninterested state if we allow it, but that makes the question does disinterest lie in ignorance?
DeleteCayton,
ReplyDeleteFrom reading this, I can see you had good understanding of the reading and Haring is a great example to truly challenge the ideas of Ruskin, Winkelmann, and Kant. Haring's use of deliberate symbolism forces his viewers to make connections to all the things that these men said should not be considered when analyzing an artwork. Do you consider all of Haring's pieces, including the more difficult topics, to be beautiful?
One suggestion I have is to give a bit more explanation to why you chose to include that Haring suffered from aids. I think it is an important influence in his expression but not every reader will know that connection. Great comparison, really made me think about some of our 20th century artists that deliberately use bold symbolism in their art to force viewers to think about different issues in society.
-Cayla
Thank you Cayla! I would consider Keith’s artworks beautiful. I would consider his artwork is beautiful because of the rebellious ways he created them. I also consider is artworks about difficult topics beautiful because he defied social norms and brought those difficult topics to the public’s eye. I chose to include that Keith suffered from AIDs because it was his cause of death and many of his artworks prompted the acceptance of the LGBTQ community. The piece of artwork included in my writing was created in 1982 to 5 years before Keith was diagnosed with aids in 1987. The piece of artwork included is not heavily influenced by his medical condition like many of his later works are. The first cases of AIDs in the United States were documented in 1981.
Delete