Kant's Notion Of Disinterested Pleasure In Art

1870 Words4 Pages

The notion of disinterestedness has been argued many times over in whether such a radical ideology of the judgement of taste can be presented. The judgment of beauty can be perceived in different ways, as either a rationalist or empiricist. However, Kant proposes a third way, in which beauty is viewed with both cognitive and agreeable elements. Disinterested pleasure is the purest form in which an artwork can be viewed, leaving the viewer free from restraints of the reality behind the piece. Yet, if disinterested pleasure applies to all aspects of art, would no desire be felt when looking at even the female nude? Friedrich Nietzsche was a nineteenth century German philosopher that has argued against Kant’s notion of disinterestedness, leaving …show more content…

Disinterested pleasure is proposed by Kant to be the purest form of an aesthetic judgment, leaving the viewer able to look past any outside concerns, conforming with reality. With this process the spectator should be able to experience the art work free from their own desires or interests. A perfect example would be The Pond at Montgeran (Monet, 1876) that depicts a picturesque scene of a pond, rimmed with trees, that any spectator could appreciate the beauty of but not left harbouring desires for. Even though judgements of taste “cannot be other than subjective” (Kant, 2007: 1), it also has an element of the universal voice. Although everyone has different ideals of beauty, humans as a unit can collectively agree on what is beautiful with the use of their cognitive and agreeable faculties. However, can disinterestedness be defended if the universality of it is broken down and splintered? Friedrich Nietzsche disregards the notion of universality based on an individual’s preferences and even sexual orientation. Nietzsche backs us his point, …show more content…

It has been stated many times over that to make a true judgement of taste, one must do so without any influence of their own interests or emotions. Yet, that cannot be probable without scourging the viewer of their identity and very essence of being. No-one can be expected to look upon a work with “disinterested pleasure” when the very purpose of art is to act as a catharsis, an emotional cleanser for the spectator. Works of art also play a vital role in provoking emotion, bringing out the most humanitarian responses from people when confronted with a passionate work of art. Politican art relies on the reactions and emotions of the viewer to be truly dynamic and stimulating. One of the main purposes of art is to confront its audience into reflection. Pablo Picasso does this impressingly, backing the point of Clive Bell but disregarding him simoultaniously, through his piece The Charnel House (Picasso, 1944-45) that controversially portrays the astrocities of the Holocaust, leaving the viewer with no other choice but to react to such a strong depiction of mankind’s violence on one another. Bell, although contradicting himself, promotes the idea that a personal connection to an emotion can help the reaction one has when viewing art. He writes “the starting-point for all systems of aesthetics must be the personal experience of a peculiar emotion. The objects that provoke this

Open Document