Lea Clark

Professor Gilliand

Blog Post 4

Aesthetics is a part of philosophy that deals with art. It contains two subtopics, romanticism, and formalism. Romanticism is an attitude or intellectual orientation that characterized many works of literature, paintings, and music; dealing with emotions rather than just what you are seeing. Formalism is more focused on form rather than the meaning of the art. I think romanticism is more plausible than formalism. With romanticism you can go more into depth evaluating the work rather than only seeing it as an object.

Romanticism has more explanatory breadth because you can go more into depth with it. Not only seeing it as an object but also connecting emotionally.

Also romanticism has more explanatory depth. When you look at a piece of art romanticism allows you to see it in more in depth ways. You can see it as something you can connect to rather than just an abstract piece of art.

Formalism has more simplicity. Formalists see art as only an object; they don’t see meaning or anything more.

Romanticism is more conservative. For most people, when they look at art they always see the meaning behind it or it will remind them of something. Not many people see art only for what it looks like.

1. Romanticism and Formalism are the most plausible explanations of art.

2. Romanticism has much more explanatory breadth and depth, while formalism is more simplistic.

3.Therefore, romanticism is the best explanation for art.

Blog 4, Hunter Stokes

Hunter Stokes
Philosophy
December 3rd, 2014

This piece of Artwork is titled "The Persistence of Memory" Painted with Oil on canvas in 1931, and is currently in the Museum of modern art in New York City. As you can see in this particular painting, there are three clocks which appear to be melting due to heat or some other factor. There is also what appears to be a clock upside down on a table that is not melting , and is in perfect condition but is riddled with insects. in the distance there appears to be water and a rocky shoreline. On the table or wooden platform there is a tree with a branch supporting one of three melting clocks. The last visible image within the painting is a white object on the ground that is mysterious, but to my untrained eye seems to be a closed human eye with eyelashes and a nosed shape outline. The white object appears to me as half of a face melting onto the ground with a clock melting on top of it.
In the Legomenon Online Literary Journal & Magazine , K Shabi posted an interpretation of Salvador Dali's Painting 'The Persistence of Memory.' K Shabi basically wrote that Dali was painting an abstract dreamscape. This was intended to explain how time is irrelevant in dreams, therefore the clocks are melting away because they have no purpose in dream land. The picture is supposed to be a dipiction of how there is no concept of time while dreaming and that the clocks are vanishing since they are purposeless. The author writes that this is illustrating how some nights you fall asleep and then wake up thinking its about 3:00am but it is actually 8:00am and the day has begun. Shabi believes that it is impossible to keep time in your dreams and that is what this painting is an illustration of. Shabi also provides insight on the history of surrealist paintings and explains how some believe that the painting has to do with Einsteins theory of reletivity which would completely change the idea of the dream land. This would mean that the clocks represented how the old fashioned technology was withering away Post Einstein world, and how simple machines and wall clocks were primitive and eventually would vanish. This theory is consistent with the idea that Dali used ants as a symbol of decay and the ants were crawling all over one of the 4 pocket watches.

This insight provides fantastic Explanatory breadth because all parts of the Artwork are addressed except for the meaning of the desert but this could have little to no meaning and could just compliment the fact that the clocks are melting. All of the clocks are addressed and the face that the clocks are melting is also addressed. The author also talks about the white object on the ground and mentions that this landscape is in the desert, but does not explain why.

As for Explanatory Depth I believe that this author did a fantastic job because his insight gave me a very new and abstracted outlook on this painting that is actually one of my favorites. The author goes into great detail with two different theories and provides history and relates the painting to the surrealist movements and Dali's personal style and influence. The author did a fantastic job of going into detail with each aspect of the painting even being as surreal as it is.

The author has two theories that are both very insightful, yet simple. He explains them in such a way that is very easy to grasp even though surrealism is one of the hardest styles to interpret. This author captured the meaning of this painting with facts and history, and he also made it easy to follow as to avoid confusion.

As for conservatism, there really is no "modern" interpretation of this piece of artwork because artwork is subject to opinion, it is not culturally based or something that people make a general consensus about. it is debated and often disagreed upon because it is all in the eyes of the beholder.

There is Predictive Power or evidence that suggests that Dali has used ants in several other pieces to represent decay and withering away as he does in this piece with the ants crawling all over the clock that is on the wooden platform. This is consistent with his theory about Einstein and his Theory of Relativity.

The second theory that was stated about the connection of this piece of art and Einsteins theory of Relativity is the best interpretation of the Painting 'The Persistence of Memory'
Though it is a very complex theory it shows strength by having a great deal of explanatory breadth, depth, simplicity and also a great deal of Predictive Power which is hard to accomplish when interpreting such a surreal painting.
Therefore, The second theory is definitely the best interpretation of the painting ' The Persistence of Memory' by Salvador Dali.

-Hunter Stokes

Le'Shania  Anderson

Prof. Rex

Phil 100





         Irony of Negro Policeman 1981, Jean Basquiat a painting that looks very chaotic and very child like made with a mixture of crayons and paint. The painting looks very disconnected, by looking just at the painting and not reading the title or swiggles of words I couldn't really tell if the figure was a robot or a man. I came to the realization that was the intention. After connecting the time the painting was made and also including the race of the artist I understand that Basquiat was displaying how he felt about a black man choosing a career mostly white racist would occupy. With the word "pawn"  written on the picture and springs, wires in the man I also came to believe he felt the negro policeman wasn't doing only thing on his own freewill he was controlled by his white counterparts. After doing research on this piece Jean Basquiat wanted his painting to show his distance for a negro policeman because he couldn't see how as a African American why would they enforce rules that were meant to enslave them as well. I believe my interpretation is insightful because I was able to understand what the artist was displaying.

      This interpretation has explanatory breadth because it explains the robotic and disconnected man in the painting, Basquiat took the mentality of a negro policeman and made it an outward appearance.
      For explanatory depth of the artwork does elucidate a lot of detail, this interpretation is detailed because it explains the belief of one African American man about his fellow counterpart.
      For simplicity this painting interpretation didn't have only assumptions, It was a general point of view, an opinion. The only assumption was what the figure in the painting was.
      With conservatism the whole idea Basquiat had with this painting is in my opinion still a common belief many  blacks including a time when cops have been the reasons for many deaths.

1. Formalism is an interpretation of the meaning of the artwork Jean Basiquat, Irony of Negro Policeman
2. Though formalism is radical it has great deal of explanatory breadth and depth, and a moderate amount of simplicity
3. Therefore, formalism is a good interpretation of artwork Jean Basquat Irony of Negro Policeman

Blog Post 4

Orlando Edwards

Romanticism or Formalism

Aesthetics is the branch of philosophy that deals with the principles of beauty and artistic taste. When looking at the studies of the philosophical foundation of the arts two main topics are discussed, Formalism and Romanticism. Formalism states that the purpose of art is to present formal beauty in a figurative, abstract manner or painting. In other words it represents forms that structure reality and guide behavior. Romanticism expresses the view that art is more than just rational elements, its also non rational emotions. Romanticism emphasizes inspiration, subjectivity, and the primacy of the individual person.                                                                      

As part of the Explanatory breadth Romanticism explains more works of art because it goes onwards to non rational emotions. As for Formalism, it is limited to only rational elements. Beauty is too narrow aesthetic standard and should be sublime. Limiting it to rational elements is undermining the use and meaning of beauty. Expressing non rational emotions makes us as people aware of a mysterious transcendent reality. Deeper than the one to which we typically relate intuitive and rational knowledge.                                                                                          

  For explanatory depth the Romanticism theory elucidates it’s aspects in greater detail. There are many paintings in life which have a greater reason beyond its simple features. An example would be expressions on a person’s face inside of a painting. Famous pictures such as the ‘scream’, leaves questions to why is his mouth open. Making viewers aware of a mysterious transcendent reality that Formalism lacks to mention.                                                                                                           

As for a simplistic view, I do believe that Formalism has fewer parts than Romanticism. It excludes the non rational emotions which makes it much simpler to understand its theory. Gives an experience of a purely rational type of pleasure and proper attitude is disinterested.                                                  The perspective seen in modern day conservatism is Romanticism. It is seen more now than ever that Artists are leaving viewers puzzled with their creations. Leaving the viewers to discuss the meaning behind the creation as there is more than one meaning. Very mysterious meanings leave people to come to conclusions that vary with each person. Artists want viewers to think and process what is going on in their visuals, rather than it is something very simple and easy to understand.

1.      Romanticism and Formalism are the most plausible explanations of the philosophical foundation of the arts.

2.      Romanticism has much more explanatory breadth, explanatory depth, and conservatism, where as Formalism has a little more simplicity.

3.      Therefore, Romanticism is the best explanation of the philosophical foundation of the arts.

Aesthetics

Ashli Benbow
Professor Rex
December 2, 2014
Blog Post 4

 

Artwork

When asked to define the meaning of art all I can think of is emotion. Artwork is used to express a vision, a thought, a memory; which to me all means emotions. Art can be envisioned differently to each person, but I believe each artwork was created due to emotion. Like this artwork that was painted by Pablo Picasso in 1903 called “The Old Guitarist”. When arguing this statement there are two types of theories; Formalism and Romanticism. Formalism argues that the outward appearance (the beauty) is more important than the actual meaning of the art, while Romanticism argues that art is all about the emotion, the deeper meaning behind the appearance. Romanticism is more plausible because artwork is used as an emotional power, and that's the way artwork is not only created but viewed.

I think that when you look at art, you can't only look at how it's painted or how bright the colors are; there's more to it than how well it is painted. Art is used to emotionally connect to the viewer. In this Picasso painting you can see that it's a man with a guitar, but when you look deeper into the picture it's more than that. Picasso painted this picture when he found out that his dear friend had died. This picture represents the emotion he felt after hearing such news, based on Picasso's emotion he painted this picture for his friend. When I look at this, I suddenly feel emotional, I can feel his emotions through the picture. I can feel his sadness and pain, and because the colors are so dark, it makes the emotion feel so gloomy. Also, because he is holding the Guitar I also think of how much music can create such an impact on our feelings, how we think, and just overall. I think that because he is so sad he turned to his guitar to make him feel better or maybe the music he was playing made him feel so sad.

 Romanticism is more plausible because when I looked at this photo I was looking more into the emotions of the painting than the appearance. I do believe that you need formalism when defining artwork because you do have to look at the appearance to judge the emotion but at the same time the appearance does not make the artwork.

When it comes to explanatory breadth Romanticism explain more than Formalism. Formalism only looks at the outside appearance, it misses the inward part of the artwork.

With explanatory depth Romanticism has greater detail than Formalism because it talks about the outward and inward appearance, the deeper meaning of the artwork, while formalism just looks at the experience.

Formalism would describe simplicity more than Romanticism because formalism lacks of details, this is more complicated because you're only looking at one part and not looking into what the artwork means.  

Romanticism and Formalism would both use conservatism because it depends on your own belief.   

1. Romanticism is an interpretation of the meaning of artwork X.

2. Though Romanticism is radical, it has a great deal of explanatory breadth and depth, and a moderate amount of simplicity.

3. Therefore, Romanticism is a good interpretation of artwork X.

Adam Schwabacher

                What makes art a piece of art? Is it the type of thing that it is capturing or is it how creative the picture is? Art is a form of human expression, this is a way of how humans express their feelings or how the view a certain thing in the world. Other things that humans use to express themselves are music and poems. There are two theories that we use to identify art, which is called formalism and romanticism.  Formalism is a way to view art on what you see. Like for example when you look at Vincent Van Gogh’s Starry Night you see a night sky and houses. Romanticism is the way to view art and feel emotion to it.  I believe that in order to enjoy the full aspect of art to need to view it with a Romanticism type of aspect.

When you are able to use Romanticism it is easier to appreciate the arts. You are able to use feelings and emotions toward different types of art.  For example if you were to look this picture of a sad clown you would feel conflicted because of the fact that clowns are supposed to be happy. You could see a picture that he had been through a lot of stress or have seen horrible things. You are also kind of sad because of the fact that he is unhappy. Clowns are now for being happy and spreading there happiness to other people. As the audience you want the clown to be happy and silly but instead he is very depressed looking.  If you were to look this with a formalistic view the you would just see a sad clown and wouldn’t feel anything towards him.

                The explanatory breath in Romanticism is when you are enjoying the artwork and you can relate to it. Artist use this by having a hidden meaning in their work. If you look at with a formalist aspect you could never enjoy it as much because you are just looking at its physical appearance.

                Also Romanticism has more explanatory depth then formalism. Due to the fact when you are a formalist and you are just looking at other than having an emotional pull towered the artwork. An example of this is the Mona Lisa, rather than looking at this as just a sad women, you want to know why she is sad and what has happened in her life.

                In the since of simplicity formalism has more simplicity then romanticism. This is caused due to the fact you are not able to get the full effect of something just by looking at it. Unless you able to feel for the painting and enjoy both the emotional and physical characteristics in it then you will never appreciate it as much.

1.       Romanticism and Formalist are the best way to enjoy art

2.       Romanticism is known for more explanatory depth and breath, while formalism is known for more simplicity.

3.       Therefore Romanticism is the best way to enjoy the arts.

Option 1

Erin O’Neill

Blog Post 4

            Romanticism is a movement in art and literature that many people love to hear about. It is an intellectual movement that originated from Europe toward the end of the 18^th century. It is the view that art is used to rational aspects of life and irrational aspects of life. It shows the importance of the free expression of the feelings of the artist. Formalism refers to the critical approach in life that analyze or evaluate the characteristic structures of a text. You use your mind more when you are using formalism because art reveals itself in a different way than it was originally supposed to be like.

            I think that romanticism best explains itself in art than formalism does. Romanticism says that art can be viewed any way that it wants to be. I think that all art should be viewed that way because that’s just like viewing the world. Everybody has a different view on the world. With formalism, it is more of a structured view on things which I don’t think is the best way to look at things because you are always titled to your own opinion. Many people enjoy art because they are able to create whatever is in their mind and how they have a view on how they see people, animals, the beach, the seasons, etc. That’s what makes art so beautiful because of all the differences in each piece of art.

           I also believe that romanticism has more explanatory depth than formalism depth because of all the different ways people are able to use their creativity and to let their minds just run wild. I enjoy that with romanticism you are able to let your mind wonder because with formalism it has to be specific and structured.

            Formalism would be more complicated to do because of the structure in it. I feel that if I were to create something then I would want to do anything I wanted to do and to make it random but have it make sense. You wouldn’t be able to do that with formalism. You can only do that with romanticism because of how much formalism art works are set in stone.

            Most artists put their all into their work and they are extremely passionate about it because they are doing what they love. I don’t know anyone who would be doing something that they love so much unless they only do it with passion.

1 1)  Romanticism and formalism are the two most plausible explanations of understanding art.

2 2)  Romanticism has more explanatory depth and simplicity, whereas formalism has a little more explanatory breadth.

3 3)  Therefore, romanticism is the best explanation for understanding art. 

Aesthetics

Emily Estanislau
Blog Post 4
12/2/2014

What is art?  It is the expression of human creative skill and imagination. The two aesthetic theories are formalism and romanticism. Formalism is when art is analyzed by its visual aspects. There is no need to really think and comprehend art using the formalism theory because all you need to know if just by seeing the art. Romanticism on the other hand is when art is fully contemplated and sparks an emotion towards the piece of art.

 I believe romanticism is more plausible than formalism because it isn’t limited to just visual beauty. There is much more to it than formalism.
             Romanticism has much more explanatory breadth because there is much more that goes into appreciating and understanding the artwork than the formalist theory. Many artists have created deeper meanings and messages in their artwork, not all art is just based on the visual beauty.

Romanticism also has more explanatory depth than formalism.  Romanticism controls the emotions and the artwork gives the ability to contemplate the piece of art and question what its trying to portray.

Formalism is more simplistic than romanticism because it is judged solely on the visual beauty and the aesthetic sense or emotion.

I believe romanticism is more conservative.  When people look at art they are always trying to find a deeper meaning and to fully understand the hidden message in the artwork. People look at art because it expresses emotions unlike formalism, which is just visual beauty.

1.     Romanticism and formalism are the most plausible explanations of art.

2.     Romanticism has much more explanatory breadth and depth, while formalism is more simplistic.

3.     Therefore, romanticism is the best explanation for art.

blog post 4

Allison Simpkin

Professor Gilland

Phi 100

12/2/14

Blog Post 4(option 1)

Formalism is when art is used to represent ideas to strike reality and guide our behavior. An example of this form of art is the famous statue of Plato. This piece of art uses aesthetic beauty which is eternal, an unchanged form and a universal archetype. Formalism is the view that art is a form of expressing beauty by using abstract things to show something in a different way. Using your mind to decide what it is that you are looking at and it is up to the individual persons view.

Romanticism is a form of art to express rational emotion. Romanticism expresses non-rational emotion using a full range of emotions. The emotions can make us aware on mysterious reality, deeper than the one we can typically relate to,

A.      Romanticism is more plausible than Formalism in explanatory Breadth. Romantics argue that rational beauty is too narrow on an aesthetic standard and should be supplemented with some sublime.   The piece of artwork has to have compares and is infantry powerful.

B.      Romanticism has more explanatory depth than formalism it gives room for imagination determining the meaning of the artwork in your own personal way. Formalism is almost a set in stone viewing of the art work and only on the physical realm of things while romanticism allows for a more in depth description of the art work.

C.      Formalism is more plausible than Romanticism in simplicity. Formalism has a clear meaning to art while Romanticism goes into great detail of non-rational emotion and into experiences. In Formalism the goal is to present formal beauty in a figurative or abstract ways to provide insight. There is a clear cut reason for this in art, in Romanticism   there are many components and artwork is perceived in each individual eye.

D.       Romanticism has much more conservatism to our current beliefs today than formalism does. Artists today look at art work with mostly emotion and formalists lack the emotional aspect of art. Rather we like it or not we initially interpret art if we like it or not by our emotions and afterwards if it generally interests us.

1.       Romanticism and Formalism are the plausible explanations on how we interpret art.

2.       Romanticism has more conservatism, explanatory breadth and explanatory depth, whereas Formalism has much more simplicity

3.       Therefore Romanticism is the best explanation on how we interpret art. 

Blog post 4

Sarah Nelson

Formalism says that the purpose of art is to present ideals that form reality and influence our actions. Romanticism says that a large part of art is to express emotions that are not logical but not the only purpose. I believe that romanticism is more plausible because when looking at something whether a statue or a painting, it provokes some kind of emotional response. It could be anger at a portrayal of something that you find offensive or just a sense of serenity. There is always some emotion triggered by seeing art and that is why I believe it is more plausible.

            Romanticism has more explanatory breadth because its purpose is not merely limited to the emotions that are expressed within art. This is compared to formalism that only has one purpose for art. The ideals that are portrayed in art do not extend to emotions that are portrayed as they are entirely different things. Ideals only cover a portion of art as not all art have ideals such as abstract art. However abstract art expresses emotion through the choice of colors used and the layout of the artwork.

            They have equal explanatory depth as they present the their respective things but it is merely presenting it and giving evidence through the art work but the viewer has to come up with their own interpretation and back it up with the evidence found within the work. It could be through the colors chosen, the objects within the piece or the way things are portrayed.

            Formalism is more simplistic as it has only has one purpose for art while romanticism has multiple for art. Romanticism claims that emotions is a large part of art but not all of it while formalism says that art portrays ideals and that is it.

            For conservatism romanticism is more conservative. People go to art museums to appreciate art and to relax as it makes them happy. With art people don’t always take the time to analyze it as with emotion they are immediate and therefore it is more conservative.

Romanticism and formalism are the most plausible explanations of the purpose of art.

Romanticism has more conservatism and breadth while formalism is more simplistic.

Therefore romanticism is the best explanation of the purpose of art.

Gabrielle Pierre-Louis

Philosophy

Prof. Rex

Blog Post #4

Aesthetic Theories

Aesthetic studies the philosophical foundation of the arts, the philosophical way of judging art. Asking ourselves about the meaning of art. Is art subjective or objective? What distinguishes original works from copies or forgeries? But today we ask what standards should we use to distinguish art and no art, or good and bad art? There are two versions of aesthetic studies, which are Formalism and Romanticism. Formalism is the purpose of art of art is to represent the forms or ideals that structure reality and guide our behavior and actions. In other words formalism is to appreciate abreact beauty through aesthetic senses. However, Romanticism is a major part of art’s no limitation function to express non-rational emotions. Romantics argue that rational beauty is too narrow an aesthetic standard and should be supplemented with the sublime – something that’s overwhelming beyond comprehension, lofty, vast, or infinitely powerful.

            I believe Romanticism is more plausible because it allows us to see mysterious things, and it gives us full range of experiences, when life become incomplete we become out of touch with nature and ourselves.

Romanticism have more explanatory breadth than formalism because romanticism focus more so on artwork based on rationality and how it impacts viewers on an emotional level. Formalism doesn’t not express emotional aspect of artwork; because of this therefore romanticism have more explanatory breath than formalism.

Romanticism has more explanatory depth than formalism because of how it describes what something is in detail. Also it describes what art is in better detail than formalism, it says that art can be whatever it wants to be and art shouldn’t have rules to follow. In other words formalism artwork is more of viewing with confusion where as romanticism give description. Therefore romanticism has more explanatory depth then formalism.

As you can see formalism have more simplicity then romanticism, because it doesn’t have a lot of explanation on why something is what it is. Formalist are more focused on how abstract the artwork form is, basically you can only judge the artwork by viewing then in words. Which makes formalism more confusing because emotion differ from person to person, because emotion doesn’t allow a lot of people to see things they would like to see them as.

Romanticism has more conservatism than formalism does. Romanticism is more consistent; it has a consistency about our common belief. Todays people use there emotion to judge a painting rather then the structure form. Many people may disagree with me, because they feel that maybe formalism have more explanation then romanticism. Then again formalism feels that artwork has more meaning and value than just its rational form.

1.                    Romanticism and Formalism are the most plausible explanations understanding what art is.

2.                    Romanticism have much more explanatory breadth, explanatory depth, and conservatism whereas, formalism has a little more simplicity

3.                    Therefore, romanticism is the best explanation of understanding what art is.