Art as Feminism

Outside Reading

Art as Feminism: Carolyn Korsmeyer

The article starts with the disclaimer that many established art experts (meaning historians, curators, critics, etc.) have a hard time defining what art is.  Many art experts don't even want to begin to define art for fear of creating categories that possible art expressions cannot fit into.  However, there is an agreement on what traditional fine art is.  Traditional fine art, according to the article, makes a clear distinction between art and craft, does not have a political significance and is usually the product of a lone genius.  Korsmeyer then goes to explain how feminist artists "main agenda" is to challenge the standards.  One of the more favored examples in the article is the use of craft materials in feminist art.

Judy Chicago's The Dinner Party

The picture above is an installment by Judy Chicago made almost entirely out of crafts (the plates, tables, cups, quilts) but it was also a collaborative project done by over one hundred women and contains a political message.  Each place setting is for a female figure from history or myth and uses the craft of quilting to personalize each setting.

Disinterested Interest

Disinterested Interest 

Other Readings: Roger Scruton/Beauty

October 12, 2015

One of the most intriguing parts of Immanuel Kant’s aesthetic theory is the concept of disinterested interest. Kant begins by distinguishing between interest and disinterest. Humans, he says, take on an interested attitude towards something when it serves as a means to their end. Interested objects are instruments designed at achieving some sort of aim or end goal. Our interaction with such objects is driven by appetites, needs, and desires. However, there is a second type of interest that treats objects as ends in themselves. Our interest toward such objects is wholly devoted to the object itself, not the objects purpose. This, Kant calls disinterested interest. We express such interest when we spend time with a close friend. We do not treat time spent with a loved one as a fulfillment of any desire or satisfaction of any goal since the interest is fully placed in the person to whom you stand in relation to. In moments of disinterested interest, no substitute for the object or person that holds our complete admiration will do. You cannot substitute a stranger for your friend. Only the specific object toward which our full attention is geared will do. Disinterested interest is a pure judgement of beauty that is not interested in the use or practicality of an object. Such interest takes on a curious attitude toward it’s object, attempting to understand, value, and delight in the object.

Beautiful Motion

Beautiful Motion

Gerardus Van Der Leeuw/Sacred and Profane Beauty

October 2015

“Before man learned how to use any instruments at all, he moved the most perfect instrument of all, his body.”(p.13) The beauty of motion begins and ends with the human body. There is beauty in the ritualistic repetition of running and feeling the ache of your legs. Engaging the body in physical activity and play is one of the best ways to release pent up desire and longing. The intimate relationship between soul and body is greatly underestimated today. Van Der Leeuw comments on this breakup of unity, lamenting how dance has become entertainment rather than religious and sports have become secularized rather than sacred. But despite this, the power of this divinely ordained connection between the body and soul remains. The body and soul are not dualistic entities. They work together to create beautiful motion. The bodily movements we make are an expression of ourselves. The body is the outlet for the cultivation of the soul. Bodily motion has the reciprocal ability to shape the posture of one’s soul. Assuming the position of prostration during prayer, for example, is a posture of the body that usher’s the soul into quiet reverence. Out of the overflow of what we feed our souls, we act. Lashing out in violence, making a degrading comment, and acting selfishly are all symptoms of an unhealthy soul. The soul thirsts for constant exposure to beauty. We were made to taste, touch, smell, see, and hear beautiful things and express the joy received from these things through our bodies. Bodily movement is the consummation of experienced beauty.

Maggie McBrady: Questions and Confusions

Student Chosen Topic
            I like things to be structured.  I want to know what is expected of me and what I need to do to meet those expectations.  My initial understanding of the first essay assignment made it seem like a simple task but thinking about it further the task seems to be more daunting.  This is my first real philosophy class; I took Phil 101 last semester but that doesn't really count in my mind.  As I said before, I like things that are structured and philosophy seems anything but structured.  There are different thoughts and theories but they are all open ended and ready for interpretation.
          I was just re-reading Ancient Art and Ritual and a sentence jumped out at me:

We mimic not only others but ourselves mechanically, even after all emotion proper to the act is dead; and then because mimicry has a certain ingenious charm, it becomes an end in itself for ritual, even for art.

If I'm understanding the author correctly I don't think I agree with her.  If mimicry takes out the emotion from an act and is only going through the motion then how can it become an end in itself for ritual or art?  If mimicry is what develops into a ritual or art then a ritual would have no emotion behind it.  Ritual, in my opinion, is supposed to have an assortment of emotions behind it.  Ritual is supposed to mean something for the people who practice it and art is supposed to make those who view or witness it feel something.  If there is no emotion then it is just a group of people doing pointless motions.  Maybe the authors intent is going over my head or I've spun the words in my head too many times to get the clear meaning. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So after asking about the quote and gaining a bit more insight I have reached a final conclusion.  The author was indeed saying what I initially thought and I still disagree for the same reasons.

Life As a Work of Art

Life As a Work of Art

Topic of Choice
September 24, 2015

What sets humans apart from the rest of created order is that we are artists. We were created to create. The 20th century nihilist philosopher, Friedrich Nietzsche believed that life was ultimately meaningless; yet he went on to say that “man would rather have the Void as his meaning than be void of meaning.” Nietzsche saw the vanity of life as an opportunity to courageously and autonomously project our own meaning and values onto life. Because of the death of God, anything is possible. He called for people to create their own values and treat their lives as a work of art. Nietzsche’s writings deeply influenced and inspired the Nazi Party’s commitment to German supremacy. The Judeo-Christian worldview holds that God bestowed upon humans the freedom to create. However, unlike Nietzsche’s system, this privilege came with one condition: we are to live and create within the parameters of that which God has said to be good and true. In Genesis chapter one God commands Adam and Eve not to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. To eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil is to put yourself in the place of God and declare what is good and true. In Nietzsche’s system, there are no parameters because life is meaningless. Man is autonomous and free to create whatever he pleases, be it good or evil. In Christianity, life is given meaning and structure through the commands of God, which are the parameters within which humans were made to create. Anything created outside of the truth of God’s command leads to death. We are not Creators, as Nietzsche suggests. We are sub-creators. We ourselves are not the Artist but the image of the artist. 

The Dance of the Trinity

The Dance of the Trinity

Other Readings: Proverbs 8

September 24, 2015

The Nicene Creed states that God is three in persons and one in essence. By nature, the triune God of the Bible is a relational being. Proverbs 8 gives a colorful, unique glimpse into the Judeo-Christian understanding of creation. In this passage of Scripture, Jesus is referred to as the personified wisdom of God. “I was beside him like a master workman, and I was daily his delight, rejoicing before him always.”(8:30) The Hebrew word for “delight” suggests that the creative act the Divine was a dance. God was playing, singing, and dancing as he formed the universe. The famous American philosopher-theologian, Jonathan Edwards believed that God created the world not out of personal deficiency but out of an overflow of love and joy in the perfection of his trinitarian being. The nature of love is dynamic and fluid, always extending itself to others. God communicates his glory by creating a people for himself who can share in the praise of his glory and participate in the dance of the trinity. In his book, Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis beautifully articulates that “in Christianity God is not an impersonal thing nor a static thing - not even just one person - but a dynamic pulsating activity, a life, a kind of drama, almost, if you will not think me irreverent, a kind of dance…The pattern of this three-personal life is…the great fountain of energy and beauty spurting up at the very center of reality.” All of our movements call for harmony and symmetry. It could be that rhythm is the greatest proof of God. We move because God first moved. We dance because He first danced and set all things in motion. Our desire as humans is to dive into the cosmic order we observe in everything around us; to delight, rejoice, and play in this glorious world. Our beings are full of divine energy, longing to be released through dance and movement.

Rhythms of Life

Rhythms of Life

Class Readings: Gerardus Van Der Leeuw/Sacred and Profane Beauty

September 22, 2015

Gerardus Van Der Leeuw says that “the movements of life are perceived as an expression of a higher power which lies behind life.”(p.42) As humans, we feel the need for ordered movement. This desire can be manifestly observed through a football team executing a play, a car driving on the road, an athlete going out on a morning run, or a barista preparing a cup of coffee. All human activity exhibits and demands this inclination for ordered movement. Rhythm is the very pulse of life, beating in our hearts, reminding us that our existence is inextricably tied to the physical bodies we live in on this earth. Van Der Leeuw wisely observes that “life does not need to be stylized. It has its own style.”(p.43) The paradox of this statement is that through life does not need to be stylized, we make every attempt to give it style through, art, architecture, fashion, and many other mediums. It is not that the style of life is insufficient for us. We are deeply moved and inspired by the style of life. It is the inspiration we experience as observers of such a complex and simple world that drive us to become active participants in the style of life ourselves, through enactment.