consequently, the artist seeks his own pleasure at his own hand and thinks little / belittles others -
On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 9:59 PM, armando baeza <[email protected]>wrote: > Those that do not create, look for the pleasure in ready made art start > where > artist ended, > a reflective positive a,e ,or a negative one, or a mixture both. > > ab > On Dec 29, 2013, at 5:40 PM, saul ostrow wrote: > > > but what of those who do not create but receive > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 4:28 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Then we shouldn't call the initial impression aesthetic until after > >> it has rolled through the other stages? I suppose this lets the man who > >> weeps with pleasure at both Crystal Chandeliers and una poco fa off > >> the hook. He can always claim that when he thought it over he realized > >> that Crystal Chandeliers was a mistake. > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: saul ostrow <[email protected]> > >> To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> > >> Cc: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> > >> Sent: Sun, Dec 29, 2013 9:42 am > >> Subject: Re: Aesthetic Ecstasy > >> > >> My point is there is a stimuli (an impression) the affect (consequence) > >> of > >> that is the discernment (the judgment) that the experience I have had > >> is one I > >> come to associate with something called the aesthetic ( in that it > >> primarily > >> stimulates/ appeals to my senses) - reflecting up this I determine if > >> I have > >> found it to be pleasurable or not and to what degree - > >> > >> The experience is a reflex (partially intuited and partially tacit) - > >> the > >> reflection and discernment learned - the determination subjective > >> (taste) > >> > >> Sent from my iPhone > >> > >> On Dec 29, 2013, at 9:09 AM, [email protected] wrote: > >>> > >>> aesthetic effect is ecstasy,judgement follows, or the result of the > >>> effect is judgement,or the judgement is ecstasy after the effect and > >>> whatever follows after in the shape of reflection and and the forming > >>> of an opinion is also called judgement? > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: saul ostrow <[email protected]> > >>> To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> > >>> Cc: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> > >>> Sent: Sun, Dec 29, 2013 1:25 am > >>> Subject: Re: Aesthetic Ecstasy > >>> > >>> Aesthetic effect - ecstasy > >>> Aesthetic effect - judgement > >>> > >>> Sent from my iPhone > >>> > >>> On Dec 28, 2013, at 9:38 PM, [email protected] wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Saul said that judgment followed the aesthetic ecstasy earlier in a > >>>> different phrasing. I also think affect is a better word than > >>>> experience and certainly than ecstasy, which has other connotations > >>>> and is a surprising choice on Cheerskep's part.The aesthetic affect > >>>> can vary from a what was that to a much longer and more complex event > >>>> and I would suppose that both extremes would have their own kinds of > >>>> reflection. > >>>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Cheerskep <[email protected]> > >>>> To: aesthetics-l <[email protected]> > >>>> Sent: Sat, Dec 28, 2013 6:25 pm > >>>> Subject: Re: Aesthetic Ecstasy > >>>> > >>>> In a message dated 12/28/13 4:08:06 PM, [email protected] writes: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> might aesthetic reflection work better - and allow the ecstasy be > >>>>> understood as affect > >>>>> > >>>>> For some it certainly may. For me it doesn't, because I see three > >>>>> > >>>> different > >>>> stages in the kind of aesthetic event I'm addressing. First, the > >>>> raw-data > >>>> encounter with the work -- seeing it, hearing it, reading it. Second, > >>>> the > >>>> almost immediate reaction -- the feeling I'm now calling aesthetic > >>>> ecstasy. > >>>> Third, any subsequent attempt to articulate what just happened, and > >>>> > >>> how > >>> > >>>> I felt, > >>>> and (to the extent possible) why. I persist in feeling third stage > >>>> amounts to my "reflections". They can go on for a long time after the > >>>> ecstasy > >>>> itself is over. If you go to GOOGLE and enter the two words > >>>> "Reflections on" you > >>>> see a large number of essays with titles that begin that way, and, > >>>> > >>> for > >> > >>> me, > >>>> that period of reflection is, for me, unmistakably different from the > >>>> ecstasy. (Burke's REFLECTIONS ON THE FRENCH REVOLUTION runs to 98,000 > >>>> words. In > >>>> literature-appreciation, there have been "Reflections on" given short > >>>> stories > >>>> that are longer than the story itself, and they are cerebral events, > >>>> not the > >>>> "feeling" itself.) > >>>> > >>>> But exactly what I've been claiming is that individual "words" do not > >>>> "have" "meanings". That second stage -- the "ecstasy" -- is > >>>> > >>> emotional, > >> > >>> a > >>>> "feeling", and I personally think of "reflections" as something > >>>> collected in > >>>> tranquility. If I burn my hand by encountering flame at the stove, I > >>>> wouldn't think > >>>> of the pain as a reflection on the flame. But that's my own personal > >>>> word-use. If a different use works for someone else, there's no way I > >>>> can call > >>>> them "wrong". At most I might claim their use will occasion an > >>>> > >>> unwanted > >>> > >>>> notion > >>>> in many readers (I often did that as an editor), but I could be wrong > >>>> about > >>>> that. > >>>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > -- > > > > [image: Inline image 1] > > > > [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type image/png which had a name of > image.png] > > -- [image: Inline image 1] [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type image/png which had a name of image.png]
