Comments on: Is ‘beauty’ a proper way to orient the ethical life?

By: Peter Boumgarden

Peter Boumgarden — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 18:49:23 +0000

Eddie
Some really good points here… I guess the challenge is figuring out when one has to put on the artist hat, and when one has to put on the legalist hat… (and perhaps ways in which they may not be as different as we might think). ill try to get at this in the next post.

By: Eddie Carr

Eddie Carr — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 03:59:24 +0000

Peter,

I enjoy your writing and thoughts, and your friend Lindsey has added an interesting perspective.

One thing you may want to consider is the possibility of a symbiotic relationship between your artist and your legalist. Beauty is indeed subjective, as any two artists who have ever argued the superiority of their own work would attest. For example, the fascinating, albeit often apocryphal, stories about the mutual dislike between Wagner and Brahms, one whose compositions were angular and forceful, the other’s rich and warm, yet both regarded as best that the music of the period had to offer.

In my opinion, there needs to be a structure of some sort, some normative context for the argument among artistries. Law, even as expressed through societal norms, provides the necessary combination of norms and constraints to give that context. At the same time, the creativity of the artist pushes at and expands those boundaries.

But what do you do about the artist whose idea of beauty in essence blasts through the constraints and creates something untenable for the rest of society? For example, the comments of new music composer Karlheinz Stockhausen, who commented that 9-11-01 was “the greatest work of art imaginable for the whole cosmos … Minds achieving something in an act that we couldn’t even dream of in music … By comparison, we composers are nothing.”

I’m not sure I’d want such “artists” as the 9/11 terrorists to determine the ethics of the world in which I live, thus the necessity of the counterpoint of the legalist.

looking forward to your next entries.

Eddie Carr

By: beauty and ethics- some clarification « The Captured Perspective

beauty and ethics- some clarification « The Captured Perspective — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 02:18:42 +0000

[...] final thoughts in the next installment, I want to clarify some terminology from my last post on beauty and ethics. This is cued in part by my lawyer friend Stacey who sent me the following Facebook: in the latest [...]

By: peter boumgarden

peter boumgarden — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 17:17:00 +0000

lindsay
i really like your analysis… im going to try to flesh it out a bit more in the next post, so ill be interested to hear your take.

By: Lindsay

Lindsay — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 03:49:20 +0000

Horace Walpole – “Life is a comedy for those who think… and a tragedy for those who feel.”
I think quite the contrary. This dichotomy is interesting to consider, though. If I could only do one or the other, or in your words, be a legalist or an artist, I would want to feel/be an artist. What drives a legalist? rules, stipulations,rights and wrongs, distilled competition. What drives an artist? Emotions, vitality, humanity, experiences. That’s where life comes from. That’s where stories come from. I would have a hard time finding beauty in purely thinking, or in pure legalism. But, then again, beauty is subjective.
More of an analysis of the quote than an answer to any of the questions… sorry. But your article was enjoyable and thought provoking. Thank you