How Bad Can Good Art Be?

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

Worries about the immorality of art can arise from a number of apparently quite different considerations. One line of thought, as old as Plato and as current as Catherine MacKinnon, emphasizes the continuity of art and life and contends that some artistic productions may corrupt the minds, hearts, and behavior of those who experience them.

Another concern, less historically pervasive perhaps but still potent, is grounded on an assumption that art is removed, or removes us, from life and thus from the strictures and obligations that properly bind us. This anxiety may stand as a vexed tribute to the cultural power of the doctrine of art for art's sake. It may be that Oscar Wilde's claim that “[a]ll art is quite useless” is granted, but the claim is treated as an anguished accusation and not a proud proclamation. Or one may believe, with Walter Pater, that “art comes to you proposing frankly to give nothing but the highest quality to your moments as they pass, and simply for those moments' sake,” and yet want to turn from such a proposal, as from the seductive allure of the lotus land, because one remembers that one has duties, that there are tasks to attend to in the passing moments of the responsible life. The separation of art and life is also delineated in accounts of “psychical distance” and of “the aesthetic attitude” and “disinterestedness,” and here again apprehension may arise that absorption in art can be defined in specific contrast to moral responsiveness.
Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationAesthetics and Ethics: Essays at the Intersection
Subtitle of host publicationCambridge Studies in Philosophy and the Arts
EditorsJ Levinson
Place of PublicationCambridge
PublisherCambridge Univ. Press
Chapter8
Pages204-226
ISBN (Electronic)9780511823800
ISBN (Print)9780521585132
StatePublished - 1998

Fingerprint

Art
Aesthetic Attitude
Continuity
Thought
Allure
Responsiveness
Walter Pater
Accusations
Anxiety
Art for Art's Sake
Apprehension
Obligation
Oscar Wilde
Plato
Immorality
Disinterestedness
Proclamation
Doctrine

Keywords

  • Art
  • Morality
  • Aesthetics
  • Plato
  • Ethics
  • Danto
  • Wilde
  • Pater

Cite this

Hanson, K. (1998). How Bad Can Good Art Be? In J. Levinson (Ed.), Aesthetics and Ethics: Essays at the Intersection: Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and the Arts (pp. 204-226). Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.

How Bad Can Good Art Be? / Hanson, Karen.

Aesthetics and Ethics: Essays at the Intersection: Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and the Arts. ed. / J Levinson. Cambridge : Cambridge Univ. Press, 1998. p. 204-226.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Hanson, K 1998, How Bad Can Good Art Be? in J Levinson (ed.), Aesthetics and Ethics: Essays at the Intersection: Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and the Arts. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, pp. 204-226.
Hanson K. How Bad Can Good Art Be? In Levinson J, editor, Aesthetics and Ethics: Essays at the Intersection: Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and the Arts. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. 1998. p. 204-226
Hanson, Karen. / How Bad Can Good Art Be?. Aesthetics and Ethics: Essays at the Intersection: Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and the Arts. editor / J Levinson. Cambridge : Cambridge Univ. Press, 1998. pp. 204-226
@inbook{77eaed0d858e443d9c00cc8ad148961a,
title = "How Bad Can Good Art Be?",
abstract = "Worries about the immorality of art can arise from a number of apparently quite different considerations. One line of thought, as old as Plato and as current as Catherine MacKinnon, emphasizes the continuity of art and life and contends that some artistic productions may corrupt the minds, hearts, and behavior of those who experience them.Another concern, less historically pervasive perhaps but still potent, is grounded on an assumption that art is removed, or removes us, from life and thus from the strictures and obligations that properly bind us. This anxiety may stand as a vexed tribute to the cultural power of the doctrine of art for art's sake. It may be that Oscar Wilde's claim that “[a]ll art is quite useless” is granted, but the claim is treated as an anguished accusation and not a proud proclamation. Or one may believe, with Walter Pater, that “art comes to you proposing frankly to give nothing but the highest quality to your moments as they pass, and simply for those moments' sake,” and yet want to turn from such a proposal, as from the seductive allure of the lotus land, because one remembers that one has duties, that there are tasks to attend to in the passing moments of the responsible life. The separation of art and life is also delineated in accounts of “psychical distance” and of “the aesthetic attitude” and “disinterestedness,” and here again apprehension may arise that absorption in art can be defined in specific contrast to moral responsiveness.",
keywords = "Art, Morality, Aesthetics, Plato, Ethics, Danto, Wilde, Pater",
author = "Karen Hanson",
year = "1998",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9780521585132",
pages = "204--226",
editor = "J Levinson",
booktitle = "Aesthetics and Ethics: Essays at the Intersection",
publisher = "Cambridge Univ. Press",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - How Bad Can Good Art Be?

AU - Hanson, Karen

PY - 1998

Y1 - 1998

N2 - Worries about the immorality of art can arise from a number of apparently quite different considerations. One line of thought, as old as Plato and as current as Catherine MacKinnon, emphasizes the continuity of art and life and contends that some artistic productions may corrupt the minds, hearts, and behavior of those who experience them.Another concern, less historically pervasive perhaps but still potent, is grounded on an assumption that art is removed, or removes us, from life and thus from the strictures and obligations that properly bind us. This anxiety may stand as a vexed tribute to the cultural power of the doctrine of art for art's sake. It may be that Oscar Wilde's claim that “[a]ll art is quite useless” is granted, but the claim is treated as an anguished accusation and not a proud proclamation. Or one may believe, with Walter Pater, that “art comes to you proposing frankly to give nothing but the highest quality to your moments as they pass, and simply for those moments' sake,” and yet want to turn from such a proposal, as from the seductive allure of the lotus land, because one remembers that one has duties, that there are tasks to attend to in the passing moments of the responsible life. The separation of art and life is also delineated in accounts of “psychical distance” and of “the aesthetic attitude” and “disinterestedness,” and here again apprehension may arise that absorption in art can be defined in specific contrast to moral responsiveness.

AB - Worries about the immorality of art can arise from a number of apparently quite different considerations. One line of thought, as old as Plato and as current as Catherine MacKinnon, emphasizes the continuity of art and life and contends that some artistic productions may corrupt the minds, hearts, and behavior of those who experience them.Another concern, less historically pervasive perhaps but still potent, is grounded on an assumption that art is removed, or removes us, from life and thus from the strictures and obligations that properly bind us. This anxiety may stand as a vexed tribute to the cultural power of the doctrine of art for art's sake. It may be that Oscar Wilde's claim that “[a]ll art is quite useless” is granted, but the claim is treated as an anguished accusation and not a proud proclamation. Or one may believe, with Walter Pater, that “art comes to you proposing frankly to give nothing but the highest quality to your moments as they pass, and simply for those moments' sake,” and yet want to turn from such a proposal, as from the seductive allure of the lotus land, because one remembers that one has duties, that there are tasks to attend to in the passing moments of the responsible life. The separation of art and life is also delineated in accounts of “psychical distance” and of “the aesthetic attitude” and “disinterestedness,” and here again apprehension may arise that absorption in art can be defined in specific contrast to moral responsiveness.

KW - Art

KW - Morality

KW - Aesthetics

KW - Plato

KW - Ethics

KW - Danto

KW - Wilde

KW - Pater

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9780521585132

SP - 204

EP - 226

BT - Aesthetics and Ethics: Essays at the Intersection

A2 - Levinson, J

PB - Cambridge Univ. Press

CY - Cambridge

ER -