Environmental Aesthetics
Environmental Aesthetics
Environmental Aesthetics
Nature was often divided into the beautiful (pleasant, serene), the picturesque and the sublime.
The Picturesque
Picturesque:
Picture-like. Picturesque landscapes are full of variety, curious details and interesting textures and therefore suitable subjects for landscape painting. The concept was popular in the 18th century and seen as an important category between the serene (beautiful) and the sublime (awe-inspiring). (Oxford Dictionary of Art & Artistis)
11/29/2010
The Sublime
Sublime: aspect of nature which provoke feelings of awe and vastness. Nature can be dark and frightening, but through distanced contemplation humans overcome their dread and are filled with awe. The sublime in nature was thought to stimulate the imagination far more than the beautiful or picturesque.
11/29/2010
With art our knowledge of what and how to appreciate is grounded in the fact that works of art are our creations. In making an object we know what we make and thus its parts, its purposes and what to do with it Allen Carlson
11/29/2010
The natural landscape is an indeterminate object; it almost always contains enough diversity to allow great liberty in selecting, emphasizing and grouping its elements and is furthermore rich in suggestion and in vague emotional stimulus. A landscape to be seen has to be composedthen we feel that the landscape is beautiful. The promiscuous natural landscape cannot be enjoyed in any other way. - George Santayana The Sense of Beauty
11/29/2010
11/29/2010
Critiques of OAM
OAM treats natural objects like artistic readymades or found art. This approach is better suited to art objects that are self-contained aesthetic units such that neither their environment of creation nor their environment of display is aesthetically relevant (Allen Carlson) As such OAM unfairly limits the set of aesthetic qualities worth of our consideration
11/29/2010
11/29/2010
Critiques of LSM
LSM values the artists sensibilities not nature
does not appreciate nature on its own terms. It appreciates the way a painter or photographer looks at nature.
Critiques of LSM
[LSM] construes the environment as if it were a static, essentially two dimensional representation. But the natural environment is not a scene, not a representation, not static and not two dimensional. In short, the model requires appreciation of the environment not as what it is and with the qualities it has, but as something it is not and with qualities it does not have. Allen Carlson
11/29/2010
11/29/2010
Critique of AOE
AOE seems to suggest that our engagement with the natural environment cannot (or should not) rise above the level of mere sensuous experiencebut this trivializes natures importance Some environmentalists believe that aesthetic philosophy is crucial in motivating people to care for the environment. Mere sensory experience is too flimsily a basis for any real environmental ethic.
10
11/29/2010
Critique of AOE
The subject/object distinction is valid and necessary.
The individual is not separate from nature (not a strict dichotomy) but the individual is not identical to nature either. Without some subject/object distinction the very notion of the aesthetic becomes meaningless AOE reduces philosophy to mysticism
We cannot appreciate everything; there must be limits and emphases in appreciation of nature as there are in appreciation of art. Without such limits and emphases our experience of the natural environment would be only a meld of physical sensations without any significancea blooming buzzing confusion. - Allen Carlson
11
11/29/2010
12
11/29/2010
Carlsons Natural Environmental Model (NEM) Allen Carlson claims that his Natural Environmental Model
1. Uses the general structure of aesthetic appreciation of art as a model for appreciation of the natural world 2. But does not assimilate natural objects to art objects or natural environments to scenery
13
11/29/2010
In NEM
Knowledge of ecological interconnectedness and natural harmony form the basis for evaluation and appreciation of nature.
14
11/29/2010
Cognitivism in NEM
In NEM knowledge is essential to aesthetic awareness of our environment. But this is different from cognitivism in art where art itself is a source of knowledge, not a prerequisite for aesthetic appreciation.
15
11/29/2010
Critique of NEM
Does NEM reduce aesthetics to biology and ecology? If so, what is left in NEM which we can rightly call aesthetic? Or does aesthetic experience of nature offer a distinctive type of understanding which goes beyond propositional knowledge?
16