Ye Gads, am I agreeing with Miller? I feel that I am but my intellect screams NO. I must be feeling/thinking all at once.
Some emotional respones stem from unconscious parts of the brain that are entangled in conscious parts. Thus we are partly affected by emotions we can't attribute to particular stimuli. (There was a great NY Times Science Section -- from the journal Nature, I think) article yesterday re "blind sight" and how some people with intact visual sensory apparatus but with totally destroyed visual cortex areas (where vision is constructed) can still sense objects in their path or even "feel" the look of a threatening face. In that respect I say, yes, perhaps we do have emotions first or at least partly unconscious and then mingle those with our conscious reasoning. So I'd say we are emotional thinkers. This is the thesis of Damasio's book, The Feeling of What Happens. He says we must be emotional thinkers in order to function sensibly or intellectually at all. I don't think we can talk anymore of sequential process in consciousness, cognition, etc. We may invent a sequence to sort out something complex but our brains are operating on multiple neuron-firing sequences simultaneously and multiply and all engage feeling or emotions and reasoned cognition both consciously and unconsciously. So in the end to say we respond emotionally first or last is meaningless (except maybe in subconscious brain stem activity. WC --- On Wed, 12/24/08, Chris Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Chris Miller <[email protected]> > Subject: sense of pulchritude and intellectual engagement > To: [email protected] > Date: Wednesday, December 24, 2008, 10:47 AM > I like how the word "intellectual" has only been > appearing with scare quotes > in this discussion - except for when Michael introduced it > into his statement > that "Beauty in artworks (those wholly independent > creations) can be found in > striking or intriguing combinations of elements that appeal > less to the sense > of pulchritude, per se, and more to intellectual > engagement." > > The small question --- is how this assertion might follow > from the 5 > dictionary definitions that Michael offered --- and I say > it doesn't -- > because none of those definitions establishes any > relationship at all between > "sense of pulchritude" and "intellectual > engagement" -- as say, a definition > of "spoke" relates a hub to a rim. > > The large question -- is how these two ideas might be > developed in relation to > each other -- and Michael has helpfully provided an > example.(his response to > the swimming pool paintings of David Hockney) > > I'm with William -- in that "I'm not sure one > can separate the intellectual > from the emotional" -- at least when feeling that > something is beautiful. > > But once we begin a discussion about it -- that's when > we're beginning what I > would call a distinctly intellectual activity -- which can > be done better or > worse depending on the reasoning and scope of knowledge > that is involved. > > In my approach -- feeling comes first. If something feels > right (or wrong) > no amount of subsequent intellectual activity is going to > change it . (though > -- I might go back and experience something again, and who > knows how I'll > feel the next time) > > So -- to consider MIchael's example -- when I first > looked at Hockney's > swimming pool ("Portrait of an Artist, Pool with two > figures") - or, at least > a reproduction of it -- I liked it - with no thought > whatsoever of > "intellectualizing the image" etc. I wanted to > be at that beautiful > pool/country estate -- on a sunny summer day with the > colorfully dressed > (or undressed) handsome young men. What excitement! Later > on -- I might work > up some ideas about that vision -- the history of > homoerotic art and how much > it reminds me of some 19th C. Hindu/Krishna painting -- > and how it contrasts > with the Bacon/Freud ugliness that seems more > characteristic of late 20th > British figure painting -- but that would only be because I > enjoyed that > swimming pool so much to begin with. > > And yes -- I do have a enormous bone to pick with any > approach to the > imaginative arts that does not put intimate, personal > feeling first -- and > it's my historical observation that with the rise of > the secular university as > the pre-eminent cultural authority, we live in a period > that rejects that > priority --- puts the cart before the horse - has the tail > wagging the dog -- > etc etc.-- and has ended up putting things with little or > no aesthetic value > at the very top of the contemporary canon. > > > If some might condemn me for being sentimental -- so be it. > I respect the > fans of Kinkade more that I do the erudite scholars of > Jasper Johns and Andy > Warhol -- and "sentimental" is just a word to > disparage people whose > sentiments are different from your own. > > > ************ > > Michael wrote: > > > I was thinking of works of visual art that seem on first > glance not to observe > the standards of conventional pictorial beauty. > Hockney's swimming pools, for > example. They engaged me intellectually, first, more so > than by immediate > visual recognition. I saw them as patterns and > arrangements, initially, as > "cool" and aloof, as fundamentally detached from > their referents by the linear > abstractions. I liken that to intellectualizing the image, > to Hockney's > repositioning the mode of perceiving the scene from the > almost immediately > pictorial to the analytical abstraction into flat color > areas and schematic > proxies for the reflections in the water, etc. Compare > Mondrian's early > paintings, where the portrayal of natural forms seems more > natural, to the > later rectilinear grids of pure color and black lines. The > change that occurs > shifts the way one grasps the image, again, from a more > immediate reading of > tree to a more abstracted, more schematic, and thus more > "intellectual" > reading. Also, compare Broadway Boogie Woogie or other late > Mondrian's to > Motherwell's > > Elegies. For me, there is no "reading" of the > structure of the "Elegy." It's > all immediate. > > > ____________________________________________________________ > Get a degree and open new doors. Click to find flexible and > affordable > programs now. > http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/PnY6rc147JvjI3Kt94VH4q3pPqbhbx > fjm5reH7PUUvuiXNwjuDq08/
