Monday, July 7:  Discussion Post One Due: 

Look over the syllabus and access the external course site; on Blackboard, post an introduction (e.g., who are you? what do you study? have you had philosophy before? what interests you in art? is there anything else you would like to share?) and also ask any questions you have about the course (e.g., the syllabus, the external class site, or anything else practical about the class) on the Discussion Board Forum.

Friday, July 11:  Discussion Post Two Due: 

On Blackboard, thoughtfully and thoroughly engage any one set of the three discussion prompt sets below:

(1) As Tolstoy clearly demonstrates, the definition of art is inextricable from feeling (emotion): emotion is experienced in the artist, who thereby communicates it to us through his/her art.  Plato is clearly wary of feelings—he recognizes how dangerous they can be.  Instead, he upholds the “Forms” (aka “Ideas,” the truth of something in itself that is accessible through reason alone) as the better, higher, righter goal we ought to seek.  Do you agree that art (the emotional) and truth (the rational) are two different pursuits?  When is art better?  When is truth better?  Can art ever be true?  Can truth ever be artistic/aesthetic?   

(2) Plato’s Republic expresses the typical Greek view that we are naturally mimetic (i.e., we naturally imitate things, this is how we learn), and therefore, to create the ideal society, we must censor what art children are exposed to so that they will grow up to be virtuous.  Discuss whether you think we are naturally mimetic or not, and whether you agree that to make the ideal society, there should be censorship.  What are some examples of things our society has censored (or does censor)?  Is this censorship right/just? 

(3) Would Tolstoy consider something art if the artist created it to be expressive of his/her feeling of fear, yet it aroused in viewers the feeling of hilarity?  If not, is it the artist’s fault, or the fault of the viewers for ‘not getting it?’  Can you come up with examples of “art” that seem to fail?  Are they, for you, still art?

Tuesday, July 15:  Discussion Post Three Due: 

On Blackboard, thoughtfully and thoroughly engage any one set of the three discussion prompt sets below:

(1) Find different examples of art (any medium) that represent the beautiful, the good, and the pleasant (upload files or provide internet links) and offer your own interpretation as to why these examples fit Kant’s distinctions.  Do you agree with his distinctions?  Would you change them in any way? 

(2) There are two main critiques leveled against Kant’s “Third Moment,” that the beautiful must have purposiveness without having an actual purpose: the first is that critics can argue that art can have a purpose, e.g., propaganda can be art and have a goal; the second is that other critics may say that the assumption of purposivity is an imposition of a concept or of interest in the judgment, and therefore violates Kant’s own theory.  Thoughtfully address these two critiques: do you think they are right or wrong?, do you agree with them?, do they destroy Kant’s theory?, is there a clarification that could ease the problem?, etc.

(3) Kant’s “Fourth Moment,” that aesthetic judgment is necessary, includes a significant address of how there is a “common sense” (broached in the “Second Moment,” on universality) amongst all people concerning aesthetic judgments.  Contribute some examples of art (any medium, upload or include links to them) that you believe demonstrate or disprove this common sense, and explain why.

Thursday, July 17:  Discussion Post Four Due: 

On Blackboard, thoughtfully and thoroughly engage any one set of the three discussion prompt sets below:

(1) Sublimity: explain any one of Kant’s following points about the sublime, and then search for and select any example of art (any medium, please upload file or include a link to it on the internet) that you think illustrates his point and explain how.  Points to select from (cf., §23 ff): the sublime is formless but it invokes totality; the sublime’s satisfaction is bound up with quantity; the sublime yields a negative pleasure; or the sublime seems to violate our sense of purpose in judgment, thereby doing violence to imagination.

(2) Universality in Beauty:  Explain (for Kant) and evaluate (personally) what follows from speaking “this flower is beautiful” (§32).

(3) Genius: According to Kant, you cannot learn to be an artistic genius, genius is no set of skills, but some sort of originality.  While describing Kant’s genius, argue whether or not you think truly beautiful art can only be produced by genius.  Does the pure originality of genius violate his theory that there is a common sense to which beauty speaks?  Do we truly like wholly original art, or is it dangerous (in another section of the 3rd Critique, Kant writes that we must “clip the wings” of the genius (§50)), somewhat like what Plato argued?

Tuesday, July 22:  Discussion Post Five Due:

On Blackboard, thoughtfully and thoroughly engage any one set of the three discussion prompt sets below:

(1) Regressive Listening:  Explain, offer examples, and evaluate Adorno’s idea of the “regression of listening” wherein everything has become “commodity listening,” wherein music is “manipulated for reasons of marketability” (540).

(2) Constructed Taste and Values: Explain, offer examples, and evaluate Adorno’s claim that commoditized culture so determines the objects of our fetishes and creates our “values,” that personal taste and feeling are no longer personal, no longer ours: “Music, with all the attributes of the ethereal and sublime which are so generously accorded it, serves in America today as an advertisement for commodities which one must acquire in order to be able to hear music” (541-2). 

(3) Change?:  Adorno proposes that “Perhaps a better hour may at some time strike even for the clever fellows: one in which they may demand, instead of prepared material ready to be switched on, the improvisatory displacement of things, as the sort of radical beginning that can only thrive under the protection of the unshaken real world” (547).  What do you think?  Is this possible?  Do we see any examples of it?

Thursday, July 24:  Discussion Post Six Due:

On Blackboard, thoughtfully and thoroughly engage any one set of the three discussion prompt sets below:

(1) Explain, offer examples, and evaluate Adorno’s idea of the “regression of listening” wherein everything has become “commodity listening,” wherein music is “manipulated for reasons of marketability” (540).

(2) Explain, offer examples, and evaluate Adorno’s claim that commoditized culture so determines the objects of our fetishes and creates our “values,” that personal taste and feeling are no longer personal, no longer ours: “Music, with all the attributes of the ethereal and sublime which are so generously accorded it, serves in America today as an advertisement for commodities which one must acquire in order to be able to hear music” (541-2). 

(3) Adorno proposes that “Perhaps a better hour may at some time strike even for the clever fellows: one in which they may demand, instead of prepared material ready to be switched on, the improvisatory displacement of things, as the sort of radical beginning that can only thrive under the protection of the unshaken real world” (547).  What do you think?  Is this possible?  Do we see any examples of it?

Wednesday, July 30:  Discussion Post Seven Due:

On Blackboard, thoughtfully and thoroughly engage any one set of the four discussion prompt sets below:

(1) Art & Politics: Marcuse argues that art is needed for positive political transformation: “art expresses a truth, an experience, a necessity which, although not in the domain of radical praxis, are nevertheless essential components of revolution” (548).  What social or political issue today most interests you and how do/could you see art playing a role (either beneficially or harmfully)?  Given your example, do you agree with Marcuse that art is necessary for socio-political change?

(2) Art Experience: Marcuse argues that “art creates the realm in which the subversion of experience proper to art becomes possible: the world formed by art is recognized as a reality which is suppressed and distorted in the given reality” (550).  Explain what this means through the use of a personal example—how have you or how can you imagine the experience when art opens you to a reality that is always present in the everyday, but only in a distorted way.  Is there / what is the social benefit of this experience?  Would you want to, and how could you, increase this experience in everyday life?

(3) Technology: Marinetti and Boccioni have a very positive view of technology; the critical theorists (Benjamin, Adorno, and Marcuse) have a much more cautious/critical view of technology.  Offering a sketch of their two sides, what do you think about the impact of technology on aesthetics?  Provide some examples!

(4) A Free-for-All: What is the most important and personally most interesting idea that you take away from Marcuse or any of the manifestos?  Explain the idea in detail and richly illustrate why and how this has import in aesthetics/your life/the everyday world.

Monday, August 4:  Discussion Post Eight Due:

On Blackboard, thoughtfully and thoroughly engage any one of the two discussion prompt sets below:

(1) Most impact?  Select, clearly summarize, and explain the how and why of any insight/theory/idea gleaned this term from our diverse readings that has had the most impact upon your personal aesthetic views.

(2) Should we ban bad art?  We have been given several models by which to judge art, so let’s assume for the sake of argument that your judgment is utterly right and true; given this, why should we and why should we not ban bad art?