Aesthetics debate

Eric Kemmling

Philosophy 100-24n

12/2/14

Blog Post 3

Aesthetics

When we look towards a renowned piece of art or any piece for that matter, we either look to find meaning or evoke an emotional response. this is where the debate between formalism and romanticism begins. An argument over form and emotion, these two theories battle over how people interpret and go about experiencing art and in most cases decide if it is truly good or bad art. Formalism is a theory of art interpretation presenting the idea that art should simply be pleasurable and well made. There is a large focus on technique and the level of ability to recapture what we see in life whether copied exact or abstractly. Romanticism is not limited to rational views as it takes a more emotional approach. Romanticists believe that art can express emotion and feeling through the canvas also.

The explanatory breadth of Romanticism is larger than that of formalism. Formalism is limited to viewing the rational parts of art involving form, technique and other physical attributed to the piece. Romanticism does not limit its interpretation to physical aspects, as they believe the piece also evokes emotion through how it looks. If viewing the art piece of a sunny day, a romanticist could not only say it was painted well, but that the sun and green grass also conveyed happiness. A formalist would be only able to go as far to say the painting was done masterfully, limiting the view and explanation of the painting

The explanatory depth of romanticism also overshadows that of Formalism. Formalism can only go as far as the outside looks of the painting, whereas Romanticism can open a whole new topic of discussion involving emotion. Each person has a different idea or reason for what is happening on the canvas, this means multiple themes can be explored and inferences towards why a painting was painted, or what it means can be debated. Formalism can not explore the emotional realm of artwork, without this the expressions of the artist can’t be truly seems only the ability they have in making a well done composition.

In terms of simplicity formalism does have the upperhand. With fewer parts formalism has a solid explanation of what art should be and how it should be viewed. it cuts out the emotional aspect, a complicated one and presents art as aesthetically pleasing and well made compositions capturing our world in a real or abstract way. This provides a simple and solid definition. Romanticism is more complicated and can be confusing as technically anything with emotional value could be classified as art. This can pose problems as some things would definitely be argued as not art and may be too large of a definition.

In terms of conservatism Romanticism is also the leader. With almost all aspects of art today, including music and writing based solely on the emotion presented and the emotional responses of consumers it is clearly more abundant. In art classes in school, kids are told to paint their emotions, write with emotion even sing with emotion. No matter what any type of art gives a person some type of feeling, when a song makes you smile, or an art piece reminds you of a memory, it is obvious there is some kind of emotion involved.

1. Romanticism and formalism are the most plausible explanation of interpreting and judging art.

2. Romanticism has more explanatory depth and more conservatism whereas formalism has more simplicity.

3. Therefore, Romanticism is the best explanation of interpreting and judging art.