Abstract

Although many philosophers have attempted to explain how we do and how we ought to aesthetically appreciate nature, I argue that such appreciation has yet to be fully understood. I agree with the vast majority of aestheticians who argue that a successful model of nature appreciation will take into account the ways in which natural objects differ from art objects.Hence, the model I present illustrates that the way we appreciate art objects differs in important respects from the way we appreciate natural objects. ;It seems to me that critics of the assimilation of nature appreciation to art appreciation have been too hasty. They mistakenly confine their analysis to the appreciation that an audience has for an artwork. By focussing on the spectator-to-artwork relationship, these critics have failed to notice the salient similarities between a certain type of experience of nature and a certain type of experience of art. I argue that nature appreciation, although not identical to, shares important similarities with the way a performing artist interprets an artwork. I call the model I present and defend the performative interpretation model of nature appreciation