The Principles of Aesthetics | Page 4

be music or a sculpture that
would be pictorial. Finally, we must make sure that our interpretation
of the aesthetic purpose is representative of the actual fullness and
manysidedness of it; we should observe, for example, that sensuous
pleasure is not all that we seek from art; that truth of some kind we
seek besides; and yet that in some sort of union we want both.
This clearing up can be accomplished only in closest touch with the
actual experience of beauty; it must be performed upon our working
preferences and judgments. It must be an interpretation of the actual
history of art. There is no a priori method of establishing aesthetic
standards. Just as no one can discover his life purpose apart from the
process of living, or the purpose of another except through sympathy;
so no one can know the meaning of art except through creating and
enjoying and entering into the aesthetic life of other artists and art
lovers.
This so-called normative--perhaps better, critical--moment in aesthetics
introduces an inevitable personal element into every discussion of the
subject. Even as every artist seeks to convince his public that what he
offers is beautiful, so every philosopher of art undertakes to persuade of

the validity of his own preferences. I would not make any secret of this
with regard to the following pages of this book. Yet this intrusion of
personality need not be harmful, but may, on the contrary, be valuable.
It cannot be harmful if the writer proceeds undogmatically, making
constant appeals to the judgment of his readers and claiming no
authority for his statements except in so far as they find favor there.
Influence rather than authority is what he should seek. In presenting his
views, as he must, he should strive to stimulate the reader to make a
clear and consistent formulation of his own preferences rather than to
impose upon him standards ready made. And the good of the personal
element comes from the power which one strong preference or
conviction has of calling forth another, and compelling it to the
discovery and defense of its grounds.
In so far as aesthetics is studied by the objective method it is a branch
of psychology. Aesthetic facts are mental facts. A work of art, no
matter how material it may at first seem to be, exists only as perceived
and enjoyed. The marble statue is beautiful only when it enters into and
becomes alive in the experience of the beholder. Keys and strings and
vibrations of the air are but stimuli for the auditory experience which is
the real nocturne or etude. Ether vibrations and the retina upon which
they impinge are nothing more than instruments for the production of
the colors which, together with the interpretation of them in terms of
ideas and feelings, constitute the real picture which we appreciate and
judge. The physical stimuli and the physiological reactions evoked by
them are important for our purpose only so far as they help us to
understand the inner experiences with which they are correlated. A
large part of our work, therefore, will consist in the psychological
analysis of the experience of art and the motives underlying its
production. We shall have to distinguish the elements of mind that
enter into it, show their interrelations, and differentiate the total
experience from other types of experience. Since, moreover, art is a
social phenomenon, we shall have to draw upon our knowledge of
social psychology to illumine our analysis of the individual's
experience. Art is a historical, even a technical, development; hence the
personal enjoyment of beauty itself is conditioned by factors that spring
from the traditions of groups of artists and art lovers. No one can

understand his pleasure in beauty apart from the pleasure of others.
In so far, on the other hand, as aesthetics is an attempt to define the
purpose of art and so to formulate the standards presupposed in
judgments of taste, it is closely related to criticism. The relation is
essentially that between theory and the application of theory. It is the
office of the critic to deepen and diffuse the appreciation of particular
works of art. For this purpose he must possess standards; but he need
not be, and in fact often is not, aware of them. A fine taste may serve
his ends. Not infrequently, however, the critic endeavors to make clear
to himself and his readers the principles he is employing. Now, on its
normative side, aesthetics is ideally the complete rationale of criticism,
the systematic achievement, for its own sake, of what the thoughtful
critic attempts with less exactness and for the direct purpose of
appreciation. It is beyond the province of aesthetics to criticize any
particular work of art, except by way of illustration. The importance of