Nick Zangwill's Artistic formalism

 

The debate over formalism in aesthetics revolves around the idea that aesthetic properties are determined by certain non-aesthetic properties. Different versions of formalism primarily differ in their identification of which non-aesthetic properties are relevant. For the purposes of this discussion, we will focus on formal characterizations of artworks, particularly in visual art, as introduced by Nick Zangwill.

 

Nick Zangwill differentiates between arrangements of lines, shapes, and colors (including properties like shininess and glossiness) as formal properties, contrasting them with non-formal properties, which are influenced by the artwork’s production history or context. Zangwill captures this divide by stating that formal properties are those determined solely by sensory or physical properties, as long as these properties are not relational to other things or times. This definition aligns with the intuitive idea that formal properties are directly perceivable.

 

Zangwill acknowledges that some philosophers argue that aesthetic properties are dispositions to provoke responses in human beings. To accommodate this, he uses the term "narrow" to include sensory properties, non-relational physical properties, and dispositions that might be part-constitutive of aesthetic properties. Conversely, "broad" covers extrinsic properties like the history of a work's production. Thus, formal properties are determined entirely by narrow non-aesthetic properties, while non-formal aesthetic properties are partly determined by broad non-aesthetic properties.

 

In this framework, Zangwill identifies Extreme Formalism as the view that all aesthetic properties of an artwork are formal and narrowly determined. Anti-Formalism holds that no aesthetic properties are formal, instead being broadly determined by both history of production and narrow non-aesthetic properties. Zangwill’s own position, Moderate Formalism, contends that some aesthetic properties are formal, while others are not. This stance allows Zangwill to counter arguments put forward by anti-formalists.

 

Kendall Walton’s influential position argues that to make any aesthetic judgment about an artwork, one must see it under an art-historical category. This counters attempts to focus solely on the works themselves without considering extraneous factors. Walton uses "intuition pumps" to support his proposal, suggesting that aesthetic properties depend on how artworks are categorized historically.

 

Zangwill, defending Moderate Formalism, argues that Walton's thesis is only partially accurate. He asserts that a significant class of artworks possess purely formal aesthetic properties that emerge from the configuration of colors and shapes alone. This narrower determination contrasts with Walton’s claim that the history of production partly determines aesthetic properties by dictating the category under which the work is perceived. Zangwill challenges Walton’s assertion that most works and their values are category-dependent, aiming to vindicate the idea that aesthetic concepts can exclude facts about an artwork’s origin.

 

Walton’s argument about representational properties highlights a marble bust resembling a Roman emperor, which we interpret as representing a man with specific features. Walton asks why we don’t see it as representing a motionless, uniformly colored man severed at the chest. His distinction between standard, contra-standard, and variable properties explains this: the bust’s uniform color and motionlessness are standard properties for busts, influencing our perception.

 

Zangwill concedes that representational properties, which are partly determined by the history of production, contribute to some aesthetic properties being non-formal. This is acceptable within Moderate Formalism, as many artworks are not representational and are unaffected by this consideration. Thus, while Walton’s argument holds for a subset of artworks, it does not undermine the broader Moderate Formalism.

 

Walton extends his argument, claiming that an artwork’s art-historical category is aesthetically relevant because it affects how one perceives the work. His well-known example involves a society without painting but producing works called guernicas, similar to Picasso’s "Guernica" but in bas-relief. In this society, Picasso’s "Guernica" would be a flat guernica, perceived differently than in our society, illustrating that aesthetic properties depend on the categories under which we perceive artworks.

 

Zangwill challenges Walton’s account by questioning the psychological process behind category-dependent judgments. He argues that we can make aesthetic judgments about whole categories or compare items across categories without subconsciously operating within a more embracing category. According to Zangwill, phenomenological reflection does not support the view that aesthetic judgments are inherently category-dependent.

 

Zangwill proposes an alternative: when we say something is “elegant for a C” or “an elegant C,” we are communicating degrees of aesthetic qualities more conveniently. This pragmatism does not mean that category-dependent judgments are essential. Instead, category-neutral aesthetic judgments are fundamental, enabling comparisons. Thus, Zangwill maintains that Walton has not disproven the possibility of category-neutral judgments.

 

Zangwill concludes that we can resist being swayed by Walton’s intuition pumps. Even if two aesthetically indistinguishable objects are categorized differently, this does not necessarily change their aesthetic properties. We can acknowledge that referencing art-historical categories is convenient for classification without conceding that it is essential for understanding aesthetic value. This perspective supports Moderate Formalism, affirming that while some aesthetic properties are influenced by historical context, others remain purely formal and independent of such considerations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Clive Bell's Artistic Formalism

 

Clive Bell's Artistic Formalism emphasizes that the value of pictorial art lies solely in its formal qualities—lines, colors, and their arrangements on the canvas. Bell introduces the concept of "Significant Form," a quality shared by all objects that evoke aesthetic emotions. According to Bell, this significant form is the only common element among diverse artworks that provoke such emotions. This focus on form means that the worth of an artwork is judged by its ability to stir aesthetic feelings through its formal properties alone, disregarding content, historical context, or artist intention.

 

Bell argues that the recognition of a work of art hinges on the viewer's emotional response. The role of the critic, then, is to help others perceive these forms and feel the corresponding aesthetic emotions. This subjectivity is crucial to Bell's theory, suggesting that without a personal emotional connection, one cannot legitimately recognize or judge an artwork. Bell maintains that the aesthetic experience is distinct and separate from other emotional responses, leading to a unique form of "aesthetic exaltation" that transports viewers beyond everyday life.

 

Bell asserts that true appreciation of art involves a pure aesthetic response, untainted by human interests or representational content. He argues that focusing on representation or historical context leads to "impure appreciation." According to Bell, such interests are sociologically contingent and thus cannot be considered true art. He believes that significant form transcends time and place, providing a lasting value that remains stable and unobscure. This pursuit of timeless significance seeks to identify works that provoke an aesthetic emotion independent of historical and cultural context.

 

Critics like Thomas McLaughlin and John Carey challenge Bell's notion of a pure aesthetic emotion. McLaughlin argues that aesthetic responses are intertwined with personal emotional patterns, while Carey questions the possibility of sharing the same aesthetic emotion across different historical periods. Despite these criticisms, Bell's goal is to identify lasting values in art, though his insistence on a purely formal aesthetic emotion remains contentious.

 

Bell contends that true aesthetic appreciation does not require knowledge of art history or the artist's intentions. He differentiates between aesthetic judgments, which focus on formal qualities, and non-aesthetic judgments, which consider historical, political, or personal significance. For Bell, the true value of an artwork lies in its ability to provoke aesthetic emotions through significant form, independent of any external context or representation.

 

Bell's Artistic Formalism is often seen as a defense of abstract art, emphasizing the importance of form over representational accuracy. This perspective dismisses many values traditionally associated with art, such as historical significance or representational content, focusing instead on the formal qualities that evoke aesthetic emotions.

 

Bell's extreme Formalism, which ties the nature of art to formal properties alone, is problematic. It excludes many aspects of art appreciation, such as historical context or representational content, and fails to accommodate the evolving nature of art practices. However, elements of Bell's theory can be salvaged through a more moderate approach.

 

Moderate Formalism recognizes both formal and non-formal aesthetic properties. Formal beauty is determined by sensory and intrinsic physical properties, while non-formal beauty involves broader aspects like content and context. This approach allows for a more comprehensive understanding of aesthetic value, accommodating a range of artistic practices and viewer responses.

 

In this way, Moderate Formalism asserts that while formal properties play a crucial role in aesthetic appreciation, they are not the sole determinant of an artwork's value. By acknowledging both formal and non-formal aesthetic properties, this approach offers a more flexible and inclusive framework for understanding art.

 

 

 

 

 

Viktor Shklovsky's "Art as Technique" (Summary)

 

 

"Art involves the process of thinking through visual representations. Poetry, in particular, embodies this form of thought by employing imagery, which allows for a more efficient mental process and a sense of ease in comprehension. The notion that art relies fundamentally on imagery has led to various interpretations of artistic works, extending even to music, architecture, and lyric poetry. Many still hold the belief that poetry primarily involves thinking in images. However, contrary to this expectation, the imagery in poetry remains relatively consistent across time, culture, and individual poets. It seems that these images are not unique to any one poet but rather belong universally. Understanding a particular era reveals that the images employed by a poet are often borrowed from others rather than being original creations. Poetic works are distinguished based on the innovative techniques poets employ and how they manipulate language rather than the uniqueness of their imagery. Poets are more concerned with organizing existing images than generating new ones. Thus, the ability to recall and arrange imagery is paramount for poets, overshadowing the importance of creative invention."

Imagistic thought doesn't encompass all aspects of art, including verbal art like poetry. Changes in imagery aren't crucial for poetry's development. Sometimes, something might be seen as poetic even if it wasn't intended to be. This shows that our perception plays a significant role in attributing artistry to a work.

 

In a narrow sense, "works of art" refer to pieces created with techniques aimed at being clearly artistic. Imagery serves two purposes: as a practical way of thinking, categorizing objects, and as a poetic tool to enhance impressions.

 

For instance, if I want to get a child's attention when they're making a mess with butter, I might say, "Hey, butterfingers!" This is a prosaic figure of speech. But if the child drops my glasses while playing, and I say the same thing, it becomes a poetic figure of speech. Poetic imagery intensifies impressions but isn't more effective than other poetic techniques like parallelism, comparison, or repetition.

 

Unlike the standard imagery found in stories or songs, poetic imagery is just one element of poetic language. In contrast, prose imagery is about abstract ideas.

 

Ideas about conserving energy and the laws of creativity are often applied to practical language but are also extended to poetic language. However, this extension doesn't properly differentiate between the rules governing practical and poetic language.

 

To understand the laws of expenditure and economy in poetic language, we need to focus on the specific rules of poetic language rather than drawing parallels with prose. When we examine general laws of perception, we notice that habitual actions become automatic over time. This habituation explains why we often leave phrases unfinished or words partially expressed in everyday speech.

 

In rapid speech, complete words are often reduced to initial sounds, almost like symbols. This method of thought, akin to algebra, allows us to perceive objects as shapes with vague outlines rather than in their entirety. This mode of perception is efficient but leads to a loss of detail and essence over time.

 

This process of "algebrization" or over-automatization of objects minimizes the effort required for perception. Objects are simplified to their most essential features or even function according to predetermined formulas, diminishing their presence in cognition.

2

Habitualization, or the unconscious repetition of actions, consumes various aspects of life, including work, relationships, and even the fear of war. Art, on the other hand, serves to reawaken our sensation of life by presenting things as they are perceived rather than as they are known.

 

Art achieves this by making objects unfamiliar and forms challenging, thereby prolonging the process of perception. Art is a means of experiencing the artfulness of an object, with the object itself being less important. The purpose of art lies in enriching our perception and prolonging the aesthetic experience.

 

Once we become accustomed to seeing an object repeatedly, we tend to overlook it, failing to perceive it with fresh insight. Art disrupts this automatism by making familiar things appear unfamiliar. One method of achieving this, exemplified by Leo Tolstoy, involves describing familiar objects or events as if encountering them for the first time.

 

Tolstoy achieves this sense of unfamiliarity by avoiding conventional names for parts of objects and instead using terms associated with other objects. For instance, in his story "Shame," he describes the act of flogging without directly naming it, prompting the reader to see it in a new light. By questioning the conventional methods of causing pain, Tolstoy forces readers to confront the brutality of the act.

 

This technique of defamiliarization is recurrent in Tolstoy's work. In "Kholstomer," for instance, the narrator is a horse, providing a perspective that makes familiar concepts, like private property, seem strange. The horse struggles to comprehend human concepts such as ownership, reflecting on the meaning of phrases like "my horse" and "my land."

 

Through these examples, Tolstoy challenges readers to reconsider their perceptions of familiar ideas and objects, encouraging deeper reflection on the nature of human behavior and society.

In the passage, Tolstoy illustrates through his writing how humans and animals perceive ownership differently. He uses the example of a horse reflecting on human notions of ownership, highlighting how people often claim things as their own without truly interacting with them. The horse observes that humans strive for possessions, including people, without necessarily valuing their well-being. The horse concludes that while humans may possess language, animals, like itself, are guided by actions rather than words.

3

Even when the horse is killed in the story, Tolstoy maintains his technique of defamiliarization, describing the burial process in a detached manner. This technique, which emphasizes seeing familiar actions with fresh eyes, persists even when its initial purpose is no longer relevant.

 

Tolstoy employs this method not only in narrative descriptions but also in his depiction of battles, drawing rooms, and theaters in "War and Peace." By describing these familiar settings as if they were new and unfamiliar, Tolstoy prompts readers to reconsider their perceptions and engage with the scenes in a different light.

 

Tolstoy's technique of defamiliarization, which involves presenting familiar concepts in an unfamiliar way, is evident throughout his works. In his later writings, Tolstoy challenges religious dogmas and rituals by describing them as strange and unfamiliar, which unsettles those who view them as sacred.

 

This technique is not unique to Tolstoy; it is found in various forms of artistic expression. Defamiliarization aims to create a unique perception of objects or ideas rather than merely conveying their meaning. For instance, phrases like "the pestle and the mortar" or "Old Nick and the infernal regions" serve to defamiliarize familiar concepts, as do constructions in psychological parallelism.

Poetic speech, with its distinctive phonetic and lexical structure, also employs defamiliarization to impede automatic perception and create a new vision of the object. Poetic language often appears foreign or archaic, employing difficult or roughened forms that require slower and more deliberate perception. This deliberate slowing down of perception enhances the poetic effect and allows for a deeper engagement with the text.DD

 

Pushkin, for example, used everyday language in a way that was unexpected and challenging for his contemporaries, who were accustomed to a more elegant style. Pushkin's deliberate use of common language served to prolong attention and create a unique poetic experience.

a notable shift is occurring in Russian literary language. Originally foreign to Russia, literary language has now become integrated with everyday speech, while literature is increasingly incorporating dialects and barbarisms intentionally. This shift is exemplified by authors who purposefully use provincial language.

 

Furthermore, there's a trend led by Maxim Gorky towards adopting a new literary colloquialism, departing from the old literary language. This change reflects a broader shift where ordinary speech and literary language are trading places.

 

Additionally, there's a movement, spearheaded by Khlebnikov, towards creating a new poetic language. In light of these developments, poetry can be defined as refined and intricate speech, contrasting with the simplicity and economy of prose.

 

Despite these changes, some argue for the idea of economy of artistic energy as a defining characteristic of poetic language, particularly in relation to rhythm. However, this notion overlooks the distinction between poetic and prosaic language.

 

Rhythm serves different functions in prose and poetry. In prose or work songs, rhythm helps automatize tasks, making them easier to perform. In contrast, poetic rhythm is intentionally disordered, resisting systematic categorization. Attempts to systematize poetic rhythm ultimately fail, as the disordering cannot be predicted.