Transcript How can art express emotion?

Expression
Michael Lacewing
[email protected]
© Michael Lacewing
Basic ideas
• In an artwork, the artist is expressing
themselves, esp. emotion, though not
always directly
– Emotions expressed are not the same as
emotions represented
– But what is represented is relevant to
what emotion is expressed
Jan Steen The Effects of
Intemperance (1663-5)
Bacon, Three Studies for Figures at
the Based of a Crucifixion (c. 1944)
Emotion and abstraction
• We are emotionally moved in response
to art (perhaps in a distinct,
‘aesthetic’ way), even in response to
abstract and non-representational art
– Including music
• Our understanding of what the artist
was trying to express, through looking
at cultural context etc., deepens our
response to the work
Duchamp, Fountain (1917)
Tolstoy’s view
• ‘Art is a human activity consisting in this,
that one man consciously by means of
certain external signs, hands onto others
feelings he has lived through, and that
others are infected by those feelings and
also experience them.’ (What is Art?)
• Art establishes a bond between the
psychological states of the artist and
audience, and this in turn creates a bond
among the audience.
Refining the theory
• The work of art is irreplaceable: nothing else
expresses the emotion it does just as it does.
• The artist needn’t feel the emotion to be
aroused in the audience – but they need to be
able to imagine it.
• A vision is communicated, not just a feeling. But
the communication must be moving.
• Even if we don’t come to share the emotion
expressed, to understand the work, we need to
see it from the perspective from which it was
created.
David, The Death of Marat (1793)
Is all art expressive?
• Pleasant music that expresses ‘nothing in
particular’
– It expresses the composer’s idea of how pleasant
music should sound.
• Two consequences
– Expression is not always of emotion; the theory is
widened to refer to intention of the artist
– No sharp line between what is art and what is not
– we all make this kind of aesthetic judgment.
Art is just more difficult.
How does art express
emotion?
• A painting can’t literally be calm,
content, intimate, sad…
• Nor is the emotion expressed the
emotions represented (Steen)
• Nor does the work express the artist’s
emotion, since that would limit an artist
to what she or he actually feels
• Nor is it the same as saying the work
evokes that emotion in the audience
Schedoni’s The Holy Family with the Virgin teaching
the Child to Read (c. 1615)
Audience emotion
• A painting can arouse sadness without
expressing sadness
– E.g. someone might feel sad looking at
Schedoni because it reminds them that
they don’t have an intimate family
– This doesn’t mean the painting is a sad
painting - it isn’t
Intention
• Better: a sad painting is one that the artist
intends to evoke sadness in the audience
• A painting is experienced ‘correctly’ when
the audience feels or at least understands
the emotion the artist intended to arouse
• We value art both for the work of the artist,
but also for the imaginative work we must
do to recover the meaning
Picasso The Three Dancers (1925)
Intention
• ‘Intention’ here is broad, i.e. all
psychological states that bring the
artist to make the painting just as it is
– The artist does not have to be conscious
of their intention
– Their intention may evolve with the
artwork
• At some point, the artist accepts that
the work is as it should be
The intentional fallacy
• We cannot refer to the artist’s intention or
state of mind in interpreting the artwork
– The state of mind is private - we cannot infer
from the artwork
– We should concentrate on the artwork, not the
artist’s state of mind
• We can and should value the artwork on the
basis of the artwork and its merits alone, not
the psychological conditions of its creation
Reply
• Many psychological descriptions of the artwork
refer also to the mind of the artist, e.g. mature,
perceptive, pretentious, courageous
– To say an artwork is pretentious is not to say that the
artist is a pretentious person, but in this artwork, on
this occasion, they have displayed pretention
• The distinction to observe is not between
artwork and artist’s mind, but those
psychological qualities expressed in the artwork
and those qualities of the artist as a person
generally.
– An artist can be perceptive in their work, but a mess
in their life.
Rembrandt, Self-portrait at the age of 63 (1669)
Conclusion
• The intentional fallacy is not a fallacy - we
can respond to and value art for what the
artist expresses through the artwork
• To interpret an artwork may require some
understanding of the artist’s life, and the
circumstances in which the artwork was
created.
– However, this should not absolutely limit or
guide interpretation. The only evidence that the
artist was, e.g perceptive, could be in their art.