might aesthetic reflection work better - and allow the ecstasy be understood as affect
On Sat, Dec 28, 2013 at 3:39 PM, armando baeza <[email protected]>wrote: > CHEERS! SKEP'S > > AB > > On Dec 28, 2013, at 12:28 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > > In a message dated 12/28/13 12:48:00 PM, [email protected] writes: > > > > > >> Cheerskep's wish to limit the quest for understanding aesthetic > >> experience to > >> something akin to sexual orgasm suggest to me a simple desire for more > >> sex. > >> > > I've never on this forum tried to LIMIT the quest for understanding; I > > claim that with my repeated urging of listers to examine the feeling > > occasioned > > by "art" has been an attempt to EXPAND the quest. This forum has for > years > > talked about many interesting topics in aesthetics, but, for me, this > > aesthetic ecstasy has been a mystery at the heart of "art", and I've > always > > thought > > we ought to look into it. > > > > William writes further: > > > > "I wonder if the people who actually make art - being so engaged in the > > process, etc., don't have the 'orgasm' Cheerskep considers the proof of > > aesthetic experience because they must maintain distance. > > Wc" > > > > William touches on something interesting here. But my guess as to why the > > creative artist is not in a constant state of aesthetic ecstasy is that > they > > CAN'T maintain the distance required. The working artist is for most of > his > > work day like a highly skilled craftsman -- say, an architect who's also > the > > construction engineer responsible for building the whole "beautiful" > > structure. The engineer may have at the back of his mind a vision of the > > completed > > work, but at any given moment he's likely to be inside a dark shaft > trying > > to figure out how to use this elevator shaft as also the conduit for > > electrical wiring and air-condition pipes. It's hard to thrill to the > gorgeous > > total-building design at moments like that. > > > > Even so, many working artists get occasional jolts of exultation as they > > solve today's demand for a certain effect right here. > > > > I'd also respond to William that I think he has it wrong when he says > > "Cheerskep considers [the orgasm-like aesthetic ecstasy to be] the PROOF > of > > aesthetic experience". I can't be sure what William has in mind with > 'proof' > > there. I don't think of experiencing a taste-delight as "proving" that > one > was > > hungry or even had an appetite. It may be thought of as proving something > > about the taste buds or the pleasing quality of the food consumed. Which, > if > > we think about it, may be an exact comparison to what I've been asking > all > > along: What is going on when someone has an a.e.? Rephrased: What does > > one's having an a.e. prove? > > > > William has asserted he never uses "ad hominem" in his posting. I think > he > > often does. It should be beneath him to laugh off my aesthetic quest as > > simply a manifestation of a desire for more sex. Beware of disdain, > William. > > It's the first resort of the baffled. > > -- [image: Inline image 1] [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type image/png which had a name of image.png]
