It does not follow that aesthetic innovation is less important than useful invention because it concerns only an infinitesimal portion of the universe altered by useful invention. Human sensibility is our only channel to the universe. If the capacity of that channel can be increased, knowledge of the universe will expand accordingly. The channel may of course be augmented by many useful inventions; ultimately, however, every rational structured can be razed by adverse feeling. Emotions function like the main valve in the circuit between us and the universe. They may be artificially regulated by chemistry and psychiatry, but neither of these sciences can enlarge the instruments of aesthetic experience. Such enlargement remains the prerogative of of artistic invention.
This in many ways is the answer I am looking for.
But If Aesthetic experience is what art offers. And the Net result is an understanding and change in emotion both positive and negative.
What is that art can do that a giving someone a Dog, Hamster, Plant, Lover, or Cat can't do? Getting someone to take care of can expand one's emotions in a method of physical contact that Art can never offer. It is in many ways real and superior to the artistic experience? is it not? What is that art can do that real life can't?
On top of that if you just build someone a window and ask them to watch? wouldn't that be an aesthetic experience impossibly varied and incredible.
No comments:
Post a Comment