Stay tuned. Or do not turn the page on me just yet.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
By: Cerina Aragones
Anti-Aesthetic Pursuit of Thought Since 2003---------------Bowing to No-Brow: Neither High or Low
Nothing Revolutionary....
But how cool if we could find our WAY to one.
The Point Of It All
Conversing. Duh.
Just a former English Literature major who has lost her voice, and well, as cheesy as it sounds, my drive. I have let the rut develop and become complacent and complicit in it. How can a journey happen if one stands still?
This is an attempt for myself to find my voice again—start the conversation—and see what can be found along the way.
Questions That Fuel My Thinking and That I Struggle With. (A Few of the Big Ones)
What is it about the seduction of art that can exert a power over us? Is it about the author looking to assert a mastery over the reader? And do readers read to master the text, to defeat the author through the act of reading if you will?
In thinking in terms of The Canon how do we begin to bridge the gap between “high brow” and “low brow”—there are such classification issues here. How can the Aesthetics of The Canon and the influence of Cultural Studies find a way to stop being at odds in determining what a “meaningful” or “syllabus” worthy text is?
How can we move beyond a theoretical reading of a text to some sort of action? Texts challenge the reader to rethink, even reconceptualize, an aspect of culture/society/history—but how can we carry this off the page? I love the discussion of texts, find profound joy and inspiration in these discussions, but what happens when the discussion is done?
Anti-Aesthetics Philosophy (Origins and Cliff Noted)
I have struggled with Aesthetics since Harold Bloom first came in my life in the Spring of 2001. At the time I was determined to scoff at the elitism (art for arts sake) of Aesthetics and look towards Cultural Studies to fuel my literary pursuits of texts.
Sometime in the Winter of 2003 I came to realize that the idea of the study of Aesthetics as upheld by Cultural Studies—is misrepresented. I spent much of my MA reading list and thesis time exploring and thinking through Aesthetics and how the power of Aesthetics could be reconstituted. I am still not at my full realization.
What I do know is that there is Beauty and there is the Sublime (see Immanuel Kant), categories in the study of Aesthetics, in these ideas is where the power of Aesthetics is both displaced and located. In the development of my Aesthetic argument, I have moved from the terms of Beauty and Sublime to the terms hyperaesthetic and anti-aesthetic. The hyperaesthetic is beauty, a surface presentation of life. Anti-aesthetic is the sublime, a delving into the depths and challenging.
The hyperaesthetic constructs culture through the use of art. The hyperaesthetic, defines a segment of the arts that (through textual construction and presentation) seeks to structure a way of viewing culture. Because this type of culture only exists on the surfaces of art, the aesthetic becomes a mode of power. The anti-aesthetic, defines texts and interpretations that will not confine themselves to hyperaesthetic construction. Through the anti-aesthetic, readers question known constructions, seeking to give them power over their ability to play within the constructions so that they can locate power for themselves (hopefully).
By: Cerina Aragones
Twitter / HotSexyBookLove
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(9)
-
▼
December
(9)
- One of My Favorite Things: Charlie Brown Christmas
- Making Eyes At Texts
- Why I Came To Appreciate The Power of the Graphic ...
- Few of My Favorite Things: The Kevin Smith Edition
- Learning As I Go Along
- A Canon of My Own
- Literature In 125 Words: The Great Gatsby
- Everything Deserves An Introduction
- Have To Begin Somewhere
-
▼
December
(9)
Posts
Get it rocking.
ReplyDelete