Re: marxist aesthetics (a more serious reply)

[Jon Beasley-Murray <jpb8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The questions seem to me to be whether

i.  aesthetics is inevitably a mode of judgment, and what purposes such
judgments serve

ii. there can be an elaboration of aesthetics that recognizes its own
historical contingency, or whether aesthetics always necessitates a
claim to the universal.

My answers would be

i.  Yes, and social (de)legitimation

ii. No, and (therefore) yes.

However, I know that plenty of other people might disagree.

The above does not, however, imply relativism.  Clearly we can and do
enjoy cultural productions, and make our choices on which cultural
productions we wish to enjoy.  Personally, I'm something of a fan of
Springsteen, Gil Scott Heron, Thomas Pynchon, _Ellen_, Escher, Tarkovsky,
_Die Hard_, The Lloyds Building, _King Lear_, among many others.  These
choices are contingent but not arbitrary.

The problem is with elaborating an *aesthetics* to legitimize these choices.

Take care

Jon

Jon Beasley-Murray
Literature Program
Duke University
jpb8@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://jefferson.village.virginia.edu/~spoons


     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------