Beardsley believes that an aesthetic experience must have at least three features to be considered this way: an attention firmly fixed to the object; a significant degree of intensity; and unity: the experience must be complete and coherent.
Dickie focuses his essay “Beardsley’s Phantom Aesthetic Experience” on the third characteristic, stating that Beardsley lists others four essential properties in objects to explain “coherency”: one thing must lead to another; there must have continuity; a sense of pattern; and an energy forward a climax.
For completeness, Beardsley talks of “equilibrium or finality”. Dickie’s affirms that Beardsley explains these two terms with others three attributes: in the tragedy, as a balance of pity and terror; an ironic complexity of attitude; stability and rightness of a painting or resolution of music.
Dickie believes that Beardsley, following a tradition of the philosophy of the idealism, has shifted characteristics from the object to the spectator, when talking about the perception of a work of art. To Dickie, Beardsley would like to treat only of the effects of the work, not the work itself. In Dickie’s opinion, the object had to be in the centre of Beardsley’s theory, stating that “what stands in memory is the singleness of the work of art, not the singleness of an experience”.
However, Dickies does not think Beardsley can achieve his aim of talking about the experience alone. Every opportunity he has, he shows how Beardsley, even when intending to speaks about the experience, is actually commenting about the work of art which has produced the experience.
Dickie focuses his essay “Beardsley’s Phantom Aesthetic Experience” on the third characteristic, stating that Beardsley lists others four essential properties in objects to explain “coherency”: one thing must lead to another; there must have continuity; a sense of pattern; and an energy forward a climax.
For completeness, Beardsley talks of “equilibrium or finality”. Dickie’s affirms that Beardsley explains these two terms with others three attributes: in the tragedy, as a balance of pity and terror; an ironic complexity of attitude; stability and rightness of a painting or resolution of music.
Dickie believes that Beardsley, following a tradition of the philosophy of the idealism, has shifted characteristics from the object to the spectator, when talking about the perception of a work of art. To Dickie, Beardsley would like to treat only of the effects of the work, not the work itself. In Dickie’s opinion, the object had to be in the centre of Beardsley’s theory, stating that “what stands in memory is the singleness of the work of art, not the singleness of an experience”.
However, Dickies does not think Beardsley can achieve his aim of talking about the experience alone. Every opportunity he has, he shows how Beardsley, even when intending to speaks about the experience, is actually commenting about the work of art which has produced the experience.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário