Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
- Pandora
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 12
- Joined: January 9th, 2020, 8:47 am
Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
- Pandora
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 12
- Joined: January 9th, 2020, 8:47 am
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
I see your point. I've just set up a supposition that aesthetic evaluations ain't so obviously subjective and unreadable from the perspective of objectivity. Kant once have described aesthetic judgements paradoxical nature of which lays in the subjective feelings mingled with the net of 'common sense' agreements. But I see that focusing on subjective preferences is an universal answerTerrapin Station wrote: ↑August 10th, 2020, 7:39 pm I wouldn't say there is a "most appropriate" way. Aesthetic evaluations don't have right or wrong answers, and there aren't right or wrong criteria for making aesthetic evaluations. It's just a matter of what individuals prefer--what sort of criteria they prefer, what they prefer when it comes to those criteria, what sort of criticism/critical method they prefer, etc.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
In my opinion, Kant is not the way to go on this stuff (or for much of anything, really). A lot of his stuff comes across like a rather incoherent attempt to reconcile some philosophical insights with a lot of pre-theoretical biases that he won't let go of, where the latter are unique to his culture and era.Pandora wrote: ↑August 11th, 2020, 7:06 amI see your point. I've just set up a supposition that aesthetic evaluations ain't so obviously subjective and unreadable from the perspective of objectivity. Kant once have described aesthetic judgements paradoxical nature of which lays in the subjective feelings mingled with the net of 'common sense' agreements. But I see that focusing on subjective preferences is an universal answerTerrapin Station wrote: ↑August 10th, 2020, 7:39 pm I wouldn't say there is a "most appropriate" way. Aesthetic evaluations don't have right or wrong answers, and there aren't right or wrong criteria for making aesthetic evaluations. It's just a matter of what individuals prefer--what sort of criteria they prefer, what they prefer when it comes to those criteria, what sort of criticism/critical method they prefer, etc.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
"Art" is painfully general
- Pandora
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 12
- Joined: January 9th, 2020, 8:47 am
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
Cost of the piece?
Skill of the artist?
How it moves you?
Why it moves you?
How it disgusts you?
It's beauty?
- Count Lucanor
- Posts: 2318
- Joined: May 6th, 2017, 5:08 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Umberto Eco
- Location: Panama
- Contact:
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
One should make the distinction between the study of the (social) phenomenon of art and the study of an art piece itself. The first one of course could provide good insights on the meaningful contexts in which the piece was produced and consumed, which will be useful for understanding its historical relation to other pieces, to worldviews, the function of art in a given society, and so on, but it would not exhaust the analysis of the piece. The best approach is to combine this contextual analysis with the purely formal analysis, beyond cultural meanings, taking the work itself as the source of its own codes, even exceeding the artist's intentions and the expectations of his/her public. We could forget about Bosch's implicit or explicit intentions in terms of social meanings, and enjoy only his artistry in that particular piece (even though it also involves looking at how he solved with formal means any message he might have tried to convey). This is not to endorse entirely Sontag's famous words: "in place of hermeneutics we need an erotics of art", but the point is not to forget that aesthetic analysis is more about form than about content. And one thing that should be eliminated from aesthetic analysis is looking for allegories.Pandora wrote: ↑August 10th, 2020, 9:28 am XX century is enormously rich on methods which give basic instruments for evaluating every possible cultural phenomenon including the phenomenon of art. The subject of interest in the question of evaluating a piece of art partially lays in the system of relations to the past – in other words, a kind of formal relations in the terms of interior/exterior.I mean if one is going to consider this kind of relations, impersonal in its core, instead of relations in the terms of author/recipient, it is somehow possible to take into account Richard Rorty’s classification of approaches aiming at observing (and interpreting) philosophical texts. For example, Rorty distinguishes historical reconstruction, which deals with including into interpretations of the text its historical context, from rational reconstruction, in which only loose interpretation independent from historical context and determined by the context of current historical period takes place. Rorty applied his classification only to the written texts (philosophical). If we exceed the field of interpretations to the amount of analyzing pieces of art, we will gain, as the result, two ways for evaluating (interpreting) a piece of art: the way which operates with meanings of the past contexts and the way which focuses on the current meanings. For instance, it is possible to look at the paintings of Hieronymus Bosch and construct the meaning of the painting according to the religious cliché symbols of Bosch’s century, or construct the meaning with regard to current events (let it be covid or something else) and modern hermeneutic methods (psychoanalysis). Which way is more actual?
― Marcus Tullius Cicero
- Angel Trismegistus
- Posts: 568
- Joined: July 25th, 2020, 1:19 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: William James
- Location: New York City
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
- Pattern-chaser
- Premium Member
- Posts: 8268
- Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
- Location: England
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
Is this (yet) another thread trying to impose objectivity onto that which is not, and can never be, objective?
"Who cares, wins"
- Pandora
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 12
- Joined: January 9th, 2020, 8:47 am
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
I proposed to use the conception of Rorty. According to historical reconstruction, art would be evaluated either as a thing that coordinates with historical context of its author or as a thing that doesn't coordinate. According to rational reconstruction, it is possible to evaluate an art piece either as a thing that satisfies sense contexts of a given historical period (historical context of creation is ignored) or a thing that fails to satisfy this criterion. I see that it is a bit confusing. Abovemention approaches are concerned with functional dimensions of art demonstrated in descriptive manner, so my notion of evaluation involves interpersonal factor - in other words, not what art is (as you asked) in its essence, but what is considered to be an art
- Pandora
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 12
- Joined: January 9th, 2020, 8:47 am
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
I agree with you. Only through combining the art-in-itself and art within the network of cultural codes it is possible to obtain more compete analysis of art products. Sontag's thesis is interesting. Erotics of art instead of hermeneutics somehow sounds similar to overcoming of ethics in virtue of aesthetics as Nietzsche practised in his works. But why do you think that aesthetic analysis is more about form than context?Count Lucanor wrote: ↑August 12th, 2020, 6:50 pmOne should make the distinction between the study of the (social) phenomenon of art and the study of an art piece itself. The first one of course could provide good insights on the meaningful contexts in which the piece was produced and consumed, which will be useful for understanding its historical relation to other pieces, to worldviews, the function of art in a given society, and so on, but it would not exhaust the analysis of the piece. The best approach is to combine this contextual analysis with the purely formal analysis, beyond cultural meanings, taking the work itself as the source of its own codes, even exceeding the artist's intentions and the expectations of his/her public. We could forget about Bosch's implicit or explicit intentions in terms of social meanings, and enjoy only his artistry in that particular piece (even though it also involves looking at how he solved with formal means any message he might have tried to convey). This is not to endorse entirely Sontag's famous words: "in place of hermeneutics we need an erotics of art", but the point is not to forget that aesthetic analysis is more about form than about content. And one thing that should be eliminated from aesthetic analysis is looking for allegories.Pandora wrote: ↑August 10th, 2020, 9:28 am XX century is enormously rich on methods which give basic instruments for evaluating every possible cultural phenomenon including the phenomenon of art. The subject of interest in the question of evaluating a piece of art partially lays in the system of relations to the past – in other words, a kind of formal relations in the terms of interior/exterior.I mean if one is going to consider this kind of relations, impersonal in its core, instead of relations in the terms of author/recipient, it is somehow possible to take into account Richard Rorty’s classification of approaches aiming at observing (and interpreting) philosophical texts. For example, Rorty distinguishes historical reconstruction, which deals with including into interpretations of the text its historical context, from rational reconstruction, in which only loose interpretation independent from historical context and determined by the context of current historical period takes place. Rorty applied his classification only to the written texts (philosophical). If we exceed the field of interpretations to the amount of analyzing pieces of art, we will gain, as the result, two ways for evaluating (interpreting) a piece of art: the way which operates with meanings of the past contexts and the way which focuses on the current meanings. For instance, it is possible to look at the paintings of Hieronymus Bosch and construct the meaning of the painting according to the religious cliché symbols of Bosch’s century, or construct the meaning with regard to current events (let it be covid or something else) and modern hermeneutic methods (psychoanalysis). Which way is more actual?
- Pandora
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 12
- Joined: January 9th, 2020, 8:47 am
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
Yeah, this is the level of practiceAngel Trismegistus wrote: ↑August 13th, 2020, 4:55 am To my mind the most sensible method is to read, view, listen, watch for meaning first of all, and ask questions later.
- Count Lucanor
- Posts: 2318
- Joined: May 6th, 2017, 5:08 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Umberto Eco
- Location: Panama
- Contact:
Re: Which hermeneutical method is the most appropriate way to evaluate a piece of art?
I actually said more about form than content, not context. Disregarding the typo, I assume you got the message. Aesthetics must be about form, after all it is what is specific about art, along with medium and technique, intrinsically linked to form. Content, on the other hand, carries semantic meaning, which is not specific of any art. You can convey the same message without relying on any artistic means. Also, as time passes, meanings in art works fade away with the social conditions that created them, while their forms still serve as an ideal of composition and actually create the possibilities of new meanings for a new public in future societies. We can still appreciate Greek art, either for artistic or non-artistic purposes, even though we don't exactly share the meanings and functions associated with it in ancient times.Pandora wrote: ↑August 13th, 2020, 1:29 pm I agree with you. Only through combining the art-in-itself and art within the network of cultural codes it is possible to obtain more compete analysis of art products. Sontag's thesis is interesting. Erotics of art instead of hermeneutics somehow sounds similar to overcoming of ethics in virtue of aesthetics as Nietzsche practised in his works. But why do you think that aesthetic analysis is more about form than context?
I don't want to underestimate content, however, as it does retain some relation with form. A newspaper article is also composed, it has a form, conceived as a function of the message, but it is not art. You must compose with some aesthetic sense a commercial advertising clip or a business presentation. They are not art either. That's because in those cases the form serves the content to express an univocal message or straightforward effect, and its purpose is exhausted once the audience has apprehended its literal, direct meaning or effect. In art, at least in real art, whatever message is conveyed through a formal project, it's not direct, univocal, but ambiguous, suggesting some interpretations, but not giving them right away. The artist has introduced innovations, has proposed a formal code that departs from the known codes that allowed straightforward interpretations. And the audience is forced to decode its somehow hidden message through the medium and technique of the artist.
― Marcus Tullius Cicero
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023