Weez Blog

Aesthetic reaction and the affective component's beyond...

five cats picked up the theme in the Weezblog entry entitled "praise"
http://www.rit.edu/~eroics/MT/WeezBlog/archives/000346.html#671
quote>
it seems to me that as an artist you want to hear WHY

I myself attempt the ban the why question as much as possible from my discourse. I find that it carries a heavy load of metaphyscal baggage and that I am more keen on a light analytic tool set. I tend to ask when did you feel [name that affect]? I like to have people understanding that even the most still of pictures is appreciated or processed in time. Temporality also operates between viewing and reading experiences. From where did you come from in approaching [name that aesthetic experience] is a question that places responsibility on the viewer/reader for touching the sources of their responses. After the when and the from where one could ask what memories or reminders are triggered by the experience. I do find that the "what does this remind you of" question gets asked too soon in some gallery tours with children and even with adults -- it pushes one to ekphraksis (verbal description of a visual phenomenon) of an event or object further away in time and space and detracts from an exploration of the piece that is before the groups eyes (or mediated by the speech of others for the blind). The why question would nicely supplement the comparative framework set up by the what question and return the experience to the highly ethical question of who-I-am.

So to sum up, given the resources of the English language for asking questions: first, when; then, where; maybe, what; and last, why. I'm sure that another meaningful and analytically fruitful sequence can be spun from the five basic questions. This particular sequence fits my ethics of living a life as I am being the person that I want to become.

I've always been fascinated that the German question "where are you" sounds to an English-trained ear like "who are you". Elouise, you have access to more than one language, how would be the sequences of questions as informed by Tagalog that other lingua franca besides English?

Personally, why? is a good question. I enjoy delving into the metaphyscial baggage (and we all have varying weights).

As to potential research- I am guessing the question becomes how? and what? The devices (sans history of art and usage) have distinct perceptual evocations. The viewer starts to see a 2D plane as having depth. Using various devices, the viewer is prodded to focus upon certain items in a certain order. We play with depth of field, blurring, and sharpness (among others). We suggest with the broadest strokes some things (still recognizable), and others with fine detail.

As to the language question, sadly, I understand Tagalog, but don't speak it.

I am fluent in American Sign Language (was a certified interpreter for almost 20 years). ASL structures things similarly to a sequence one would find in a script (understanding this is a spatial language).

Time first. When. Where. (Scenario is painted). Who. (Actors, nouns introduced). What. (Then the actors do).

If a little knowledge is dangerous, where is a man who has so much as to be out of danger?

Metaphysics is the finding of bad reasons for what we believe upon instinct, but to find these reasons is no less an instinct.