The Sublime, Ugliness and Contemporary Art: A Kantian Perspective

Con-Textos Kantianos 1:114-141 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The aim of this paper is twofold. First, to explain the distinction between Kant’s notions of the sublime and ugliness, and to answer an important question that has been left unnoticed in contemporary studies, namely why it is the case that even though both sublime and ugliness are contrapurposive for the power of judgment, occasioning the feeling of displeasure, yet that after all we should feel pleasure in the former, while not in the latter. Second, to apply my interpretation of the sublime and ugliness to contemporary art, and to resolve certain issues that have been raised in accounting for the possibility of artistic sublimity. I argue that an experience of a genuine artistic sublimity is an uncommon occurrence. I propose that the value of contemporary art can be best explained by referring to Kant’s notion of ugliness and his theory of aesthetic ideas.

Similar books and articles

Kant on the Possibility of Ugliness.Alix Cohen - 2013 - British Journal of Aesthetics 53 (2):199-209.
Sublimity, ugliness, and formlessness in Kant's aesthetic theory.Theodore A. Gracyk - 1986 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 45 (1):49-56.
A Kantian Analytic of the Ugly.Christopher Buckman - 2017 - International Philosophical Quarterly 57 (4):365-380.
Kant's Aesthetic Theory. [REVIEW]Ralf Meerbote - 1993 - Review of Metaphysics 46 (4):853-854.
Crowther and the Kantian Sublime in Art.C. E. Emmer - 2008 - In Valerio Rohden, Ricardo Terra, Guido Antonio Almeida & Margit Ruffing (eds.), Recht und Frieden in der Philosophie Kants: Akten des X. Internationalen Kant-Kongresses. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter.

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-10-17

Downloads
1,595 (#6,782)

6 months
182 (#17,900)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Mojca Kuplen
Central European University (PhD)

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references