11/29/2010

1

Nature and Aesthetics

18th Century aesthetics was in some ways more concerned with natural beauty than artistic beauty.

• To philosophers such as Immanuel Kant, nature provided a rare picture of beauty that transcends narrow human interests. As such, appreciation of nature was the purest form of aesthetic experience

Nature was often divided into “the beautiful” (pleasant, serene), the picturesque and the sublime.

The Picturesque

Picturesque:

Picture-like. Picturesque landscapes are “full of variety, curious details and interesting textures” and therefore suitable subjects for landscape painting. The concept was popular in the 18th century and seen as an important category between the serene (beautiful) and the sublime (awe-inspiring). (Oxford Dictionary of Art & Artistis)

11/29/2010

2

The Sublime

Sublime: aspect of nature which provoke feelings of awe and vastness.

• Nature can be dark and frightening, but through distanced contemplation humans overcome their dread and are filled with awe. The sublime in nature was thought to stimulate the imagination far more than the beautiful or picturesque.

Aesthetic Appreciation of Artworks

• Aesthetic appreciation requires us to analyze which features of a work are aesthetically relevant in the light of… – A disinterested perspective (Kant, Dewey)

– art historical/cultural context; background theory (Danto, Dickey)

• And evaluating the work according to it’s…– Formal properties (Bell)

– Representational content

– Expressive qualities (Expressivism)

– Cognitive qualities (Cognitivism)

11/29/2010

3

“With art our knowledge of what and how to

appreciate is grounded in the fact that works

of art are our creations. In making an object

we know what we make and thus its parts, it’s

purposes and what to do with it” – Allen

Carlson

What is aesthetic in nature?

• But natural objects are different…

– Not artifacts

– Not literally expressive

– Not literally representative

• How then do we determine…

– Which aspects of nature are aesthetically relevant?

– Which criteria should we use in evaluating nature aesthetically?

11/29/2010

4

“The natural landscape is an indeterminate

object; it almost always contains enough

diversity to allow great liberty in selecting,

emphasizing and grouping its elements and is

furthermore rich in suggestion and in vague

emotional stimulus. A landscape to be seen

has to be composed…then we feel that the

landscape is beautiful. The promiscuous

natural landscape cannot be enjoyed in any

other way.”

- George Santayana The Sense of Beauty

Viewing nature as if it is art

• Philosophers such as George Santayana suggest that in order to make nature accessible to aesthetic awareness we must “compose” the environment, or isolate some features of it for inspection.

• Most early attempts at environmental aesthetics followed this pattern…translating nature into a form more amenable to Art criticism.

11/29/2010

5

Object of Art Model (OAM)

• According to OAM, appreciating a natural

object (like a stone or a piece of driftwood)

need not be significantly different from

appreciating an artifact…

1. Imaginatively remove the object from its

surroundings

2. Contemplate its formal properties and

expressive qualities in the way you would a

painting or sculpture

Object of Art Model (OAM)

• According to OAM this

stone should be

appreciated for its…

– Bold colors

– Graceful curves

– Interesting patterns

– Expressiveness of

“solidity”

11/29/2010

6

Critiques of OAM

• OAM treats natural objects like artistic “ready-mades” or “found art.” This approach is better suited to art objects that are “self-contained aesthetic units such that neither their environment of creation nor their environment of display is aesthetically relevant” (Allen Carlson)

• As such OAM unfairly limits the set of aesthetic qualities worth of our consideration

Landscape Scenery Model (LSM)

• According to LSM nature is always seen from a specific standpoint and distance. Natural beauty should be appreciated as if it were a landscape painting by…

1. Dividing the world into scenes by selecting appropriate subject matter and vantage point.

2. Evaluating the scene in terms of formal qualities such as line, color and design

11/29/2010

7

The Claude Glass

The Claude Glass was a small tinted mirror, with a slightly convex surface used for reflecting landscapes in miniature so as to show their broad tonal values, without distracting detail or color. (Oxford Dictionary of Art and Artists)

11/29/2010

8

Critiques of LSM

• LSM values the artist’s sensibilities not nature

– does not appreciate nature on its own terms. It

appreciates the way a painter or photographer

looks at nature.

• LSM encourages misperception of nature

– By translating natural elements into a picture-like

subject appropriate for art criticism it distorts the

true nature of the enviorment.

Critiques of LSM

“ [LSM] construes the environment as if it were

a static, essentially ‘two dimensional’

representation. But the natural environment is

not a scene, not a representation, not static

and not two dimensional. In short, the model

requires appreciation of the environment not

as what it is and with the qualities it has, but

as something it is not and with qualities it

does not have.” – Allen Carlson

11/29/2010

9

Is nature an appropriate subject for

aesthetic contemplation?

• Some philosophers (ex. environmentalist Robert Elliot) think we should not treat our appreciation of the environment as a form of “aesthetic contemplation.”

• The term “aesthetic” is so strongly associated with art that it encourages human chauvinism toward nature

“[the picturesque] simply confirmed our anthropocentrism by suggesting that nature exists to please as well as to serve us. Our ethics have lagged behind our aesthetics. It is an unfortunate lapse which allows us to abuse our local environments and venerate the Alps and the Rockies”

- R. Rees (geographer)

Aesthetics of Engagement (AOE)

• Philosopher Arnold Berleant believes OAM and LSM introduce a false dichotomy between subject (humans) and object (nature)

– Dichotomy: splitting a whole into two non-overlapping (contradictory) groups (ex. even & odd numbers, figure & ground)

– False Dichotomy Fallacy: 1. creating a dichotomy where both parts overlap. 2. a forced choice between two options when other options might be available (ex. you’re either a conservative or a liberal. You’re either with us or with the terrorists)

11/29/2010

10

Aesthetics of Engagement (AOE)

• Human beings should not attempt to isolate, distance and objectify nature (i.e. analyzing it according to aesthetic concepts) because humans are a part of nature, not a separate subject.

• True aesthetic appreciation is achieved through total sensory immersion in the natural

environment (visual, auditory & tactile) until any the subject/object distinction vanishes.

Critique of AOE

• AOE seems to suggest that our engagement with the natural environment cannot (or should not) rise above the level of mere sensuous experience—but this trivializes nature’s importance

• Some environmentalists believe that aesthetic philosophy is crucial in motivating people to care for the environment. Mere sensory experience is too flimsily a basis for any real environmental ethic.

11/29/2010

11

Critique of AOE

• The subject/object distinction is valid and

necessary.

– The individual is not separate from nature (not a

strict dichotomy) but the individual is not identical

to nature either.

– Without some subject/object distinction the very

notion of the aesthetic becomes meaningless

– AOE reduces philosophy to mysticism

“We cannot appreciate everything; there must

be limits and emphases in appreciation of

nature as there are in appreciation of art.

Without such limits and emphases our

experience of the natural environment would

be only ‘a meld of physical sensations’ without

any significance…a ‘blooming buzzing

confusion.” - Allen Carlson

11/29/2010

12

Right back where we started!

• What then are these “limits” and

“emphases”?

• On what would we base our model of

aesthetic appreciation if we are to avoid

treating nature as art?

Aesthetic Appreciation of Artworks

• Aesthetic appreciation requires us to analyze which features of a work are aesthetically relevant in the light of… – A disinterested perspective (Kant, Dewey)

– art historical/cultural context; background theory (Danto, Dickey)

• And evaluating the work according to it’s…– Formal properties (Bell)

– Representational content

– Expressive qualities (Expressivism)

– Cognitive qualities (Cognitivism)

11/29/2010

13

Carlson’s Natural Environmental Model (NEM)

• Allen Carlson claims that his “Natural

Environmental Model…

1. Uses the general structure of aesthetic

appreciation of art as a model for appreciation

of the natural world

2. But does not assimilate natural objects to art

objects or natural environments to scenery

Natural Environmental Model (NEM)

• In art knowledge of the artists intention, art

history, materials and methods form the

background for aesthetic appreciation. But

nature has no intention.

• In NEM…

– Scientific knowledge (especially ecology) and

common sense form the background for what is

relevant to aesthetic appreciation

11/29/2010

14

Natural Environmental Model (NEM)

• We evaluate art according to formal properties,

representational content, expressive content etc. But

nature is different and we shouldn't impose such

values on nature (as with OAM, LSM)

• In NEM

– Knowledge of ecological interconnectedness and

natural harmony form the basis for evaluation and

appreciation of nature.

11/29/2010

15

Cognitivism in NEM

In NEM knowledge is essential to aesthetic

awareness of our environment.

• But this is different from cognitivism in art

where art itself is a source of knowledge, not a

prerequisite for aesthetic appreciation.

11/29/2010

16

Critique of NEM

• Does NEM reduce aesthetics to biology and

ecology? If so, what is left in NEM which we

can rightly call aesthetic?

• Or does aesthetic experience of nature offer a

distinctive type of understanding which goes

beyond propositional knowledge?