In defence of moderate aesthetic formalism
Philosophical Quarterly 50 (201):476-493 (2000)
| Abstract | Most of the debate for and against aesthetic formalism in the twentieth century has been little more than a sequence of assertions, on both sides. But there is one discussion that stands out for its argumentative subtlety and depth, and that is Kendall Walton’s paper ‘Categories of Art’.1 In what follows I shall defend a certain version of formalism against the antiformalist arguments which Walton deploys. I want to show that while Walton’s arguments do indeed create insurmountable difficulties for an extreme version of formalism, he has not shown that a moderate version is problematic or inadequate. (I have no space to address anti-formalist arguments other than Walton’s.2) I shall defend moderate formalism rather than put forward positive considerations in its favour, although some of its attractions will become apparent as a side-effect. I pursue the positive case for moderate formalism elsewhere.3 I. FORMAL PROPERTIES AND FORMALISMS I.1. Walton begins his paper by raising an issue about whether those who make aesthetic judgements should only be concerned with what can be directly perceived in works of art. The issue of formalism has often been described in these terms. But Walton rightly distances himself from setting up a debate in that way. He moves on to take as his target the view that ‘Circumstances connected with a work’s origin ... have no essential bearing on an assessment of its aesthetic nature’ (p. 334). | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,631 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesNick Zangwill (2001). Formal Natural Beauty. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 101 (2):209–224.
Christopher Dowling (2011). Zangwill, Moderate Formalism, and Another Look at Kant's Aesthetic. Kantian Review 15 (2):90-117.
Jenny McMahon (2010). The Classical Trinity and Kant's Aesthetic Formalism. Critical Horizons 11 (3):419-441.
Glenn Parsons (2004). Moderate Formalism as a Theory of the Aesthetic. Journal of Aesthetic Education 38 (3).
Daniel A. Siedell (2011). Art in and Out of Context. Journal of Aesthetic Education 45 (1):118-122.
David E. W. Fenner (2008). Formalism and the Consumable Arts. Journal of Philosophical Research 33:127-141.
Nick Zangwill (2005). In Defence of Extreme Formalism About Inorganic Nature: Reply to Parsons. British Journal of Aesthetics 45 (2):185-191.
Khosrow Bagheri Noaparast & Mohammad Zoheir Bagheri Noaparast (2011). Aesthetic Formalism, Reactions and Solutions. Wisdom and Philosophy 6 (4):101-112.
Nick Zangwill (1999). Feasible Aesthetic Formalism. Noûs 33 (4):610-629.
Nick Zangwill (2000). Defusing Anti-Formalist Arguments. British Journal of Aesthetics 40 (3):376-383.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads25 ( #49,501 of 548,941 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,438 of 548,941 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
