Notions of the Aesthetic

## and of Aesthetics

## LARS-OLOF ÅHLBERG, NOTIONS OF THE AESTHETIC AND OF AESTHETICS: ESSAYS ON ART, AESTHETICS, AND CULTURE

(Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2014), 427 pages.

AEDITION

## Arto Haapala

In  his  recent  book, Notions  of  the  Aesthetic  and  of  Aesthetics: Essays on Art, Aesthetics, and Culture, 1 the former chairman of the Nordic Society of Aesthetics and Professor Emeritus of Aesthetics at the University of Uppsala, Lars-Olof Åhlberg, has put together a collection of essays discussing a variety of topics in philosophical aesthetics and cultural theory. The earliest essays go back to the early 90's, with the last originating from 2008. Åhlberg has divided the  essays  under  four  headings:  ' Art  and  Aesthetics,'  'Music, Literature, and Painting,' 'Heidegger and the Essence of Art,' and 'Modernity/Postmodernity  and  Culture.'  The  terrain  covered  is wide: from historical to contemporary topics, from constructive to critical analysis. The volume also presents a set of illustrative photos of the paintings discussed in the essays.

One can fully agree with Åhlberg's own statement about the essays: 'My approach to aesthetics and the philosophy of art has not changed much over the years…' (p. 9). It is clear that all the essays are argumentative analyses, at least to a certain extent, aiming at conceptual clarity. In this sense it is safe to say that Åhlberg works within the Anglo-American 'analytic' tradition, though he does make references to continental writers as well.

The first essay, 'The Nature and Limits of Analytic Aesthetics' discusses different conceptions of analytic aesthetics, and one of Åhlberg's cautious conclusions is that 'Whatever analytic aesthetics is,  it  is  analysis  of  some kind, and the purpose of analysis is to achieve clarity' (p. 25). But unlike so many analytic aestheticians, Åhlberg himself deepens his analyses with historical references. Indeed,  in  the Introduction he  acknowledges  the  importance  of history: 'In recent years I have become increasingly interested in the history of aesthetics and in the historicity of the fundamental concepts in aesthetics' (p. 9). The second essay, 'The Invention of Modern Aesthetics: From Leibniz to Kant,' is a fine example of Åhlberg's historical interests - an illuminating account of the early phases of philosophical aesthetics, for which, it is worth noting, Åhlberg relies primarily on primary sources.

<!-- image -->

In the title essay, 'Notions of the Aesthetic and of Aesthetics,' Åhlberg's conceptual analysis is again firmly based on historical references.  The  distinctions  Åhlberg  makes  between  different  usages of 'aesthetic' and 'aesthetics' are useful and the conclusions commonsensical,  although  by  no  means  widely  accepted  within philosophical aesthetics. Åhlberg also formulates his ideas elegantly and in an appealing way: 'Understanding various uses of 'aesthetics' and 'aesthetic' presupposes, I believe, contextual sensitivity and a historical perspective. Understanding various language uses is important, but understanding the motivations behind various conceptions of the aesthetic and of aesthetics is even more important, since it may improve our judgments on matters aesthetic and our dealings with art and the aesthetic' (p. 73). I could not agree with this more.

The essays ' Aesthetics, Philosophy of Culture, and the ' Aesthetic Turn'' and 'The Distinction Between Aesthetics and the Sociology of Art:  Remarks  on  Bourdieu's  Critique  of  Aesthetics'  continue  to tackle the same issues concerning the limits and nature of philosophical aesthetics. In the former, Åhlberg pays special attention to  Richard  Shusterman's  and  Wolfgang  Welsch's  view,  and  he  is critical of the attempt to broaden the field of aesthetics in the ways Shusterman and Welsch have suggested: 'There is nothing wrong in studying the aestheticization of ethics and everyday life. On the contrary, it is important to study the manifold of aestheticization processes at work in contemporary culture, but I doubt whether these concerns should be at the centre of philosophical aesthetics. The arts and the experience of art raise many important and intriguing problems that should not be put into a mixed and rather ill-defined bag of 'transaesthetics', nor should they be swallowed by a new 'somaesthetics'' (p. 96).

I  am  not  convinced  that  Welsch's  or  Shusterman's  aim  has been to ignore (p. 97) traditional issues in the philosophy of art or even try to dilute them by introducing concepts such as 'transaesthetics'  or  'somaesthetics.'  Shusterman's  project,  at  least, has  been  to  broaden  the  scope  of  philosophical  aesthetics.  The same goes for those - such as myself - interested in the issues of everyday aesthetics. Why shouldn't philosophical aesthetics look at aesthetic properties and issues in our everyday lives? This does not mean 'the aestheticization of everything' (p. 97), as Åhlberg claims. This I find the weakest point in Åhlberg's views: being too conservative about the limits of philosophical aesthetics.

In  'Understanding  and  Appreciating  Art:  The  Relevance  of Experience,' Åhlberg argues persuasively for the relevance of artists' intentions in interpreting and understanding their works. He operates with a wide notion of intention, quoting Wittgenstein, who writes in Philosophical Investigations : '(a)n intention is embedded in  its  situation,  in  human  customs  and  institutions'  (p.  114). Understanding artists' intentions does not require a peep into their heads, so to speak, but taking the relevant context into account.

Åhlberg's analyses of different art forms are illuminating. He discusses, among other things, problems of formalism in music, Susanne Langer's theory of representation and emotion in music, expression in art, and value in literature. Even though some of the essays go back to the early 90's, they are not outdated such that they would not deserve a reading now, a quarter of a century later. Obviously lots and lots have been written about these issues in the past decades, and Åhlberg's references are not always up-to-date, but his treatments are still useful, and the way he puts forward his ideas is appealing.

Perhaps  the  most  surprising  section  in  the  book  is  the  one on  Martin  Heidegger's  ideas  about  art.  Åhlberg  seems  to  have some kind of love-hate relationship with Heidegger. He discusses Heidegger's The Origin of the Work of Art in great detail, and comments and criticizes numerous Heidegger scholars. The outcome, after tens of pages, is rather devastating: 'It is difficult to see that Heidegger's essay and his reflections on the 'essence' of art are of any relevance for contemporary philosophy of art and contemporary art. There are too many inconsistencies and obscurities in his text' (p. 312). And further: 'Heidegger's Great Art has little to do with visual, verbal and aural arts as we encounter them in contemporary artworlds. He is, or rather was, to a large extent out of touch with the realities of the visual arts, did not show any interest in narrative literature,  which  is  literally  a  form  of  world-creating,  and  he  was, moreover, out of tune when it comes to music' (pp. 313-314).

This might all be true, but one wonders why anybody would take so much time and effort just to try to demonstrate that there is  no  point  in  reading  Heidegger.  Clearly,  Åhlberg  has  read  his Heidegger, and even though some of his critical points might not do justice to the more liberal Heidegger scholar such as Hubert Dreyfus, the two Heidegger-essays are a good reminder about the dangers of an uncritical reading of Heidegger - or of any other classical thinker.

## NOTE

1. All the following page references to the book appear in parentheses.

The last section of the book extends Åhlberg's considerations beyond philosophical  aesthetics.  Åhlberg  discusses  problems  in the  philosophy of history, Lyotard's concept of the sublime, the challenges of evolutionary psychology to philosophy and to our understanding of humans. The last essay, 'Scientism, Humanism, and the Humanities: The Challenge of Evolutionary Psychology,' gives  a  very  topical  analysis  on  the  limits  of  evolutionary  explanations.  Again,  I  completely  agree  with  Åhlberg's  position giving  a  role  to  both  evolutionary  and  cultural  explanations, emphasizing  that  evolutionary  explanations  are  not  enough  to understand  what  humans  are:  'Whatever  else  human  beings  are, they are 'self-interpreting animals', as Charles Taylor has put it, which  implies,  among  other  things  that  there  is  no  unmediated and naked view of reality as such, no grasp of reality which is not culturally and linguistically informed' (p. 394).

This is a very fine collection of essays - well informed, sophisticated, and elegantly argued. Åhlberg avoids many of the sins of the Anglo-American tradition by taking into account the historical foundation of philosophical problems. And unlike so many British and American writers Åhlberg refers to a number of non-native English speakers, and to less-known sources within the Englishspeaking academia. This gives an aura of freshness to many of his essays.

All in all, Åhlberg's essays deserve a wide readership - they give food for thought for both professional philosophers and students, as well as anyone else interested in theoretical issues in the arts. They are also a good example of the vividness of philosophical aesthetics within the Nordic countries - a link in a chain which will hopefully only get stronger in the years to come.