McDonald's vs. Museums

The sections of readings for today dealt with not only answering the questions of what makes something a work of art but also how the art is displayed and encountered by the viewer and its affect on its appeal. The preface states the example of a fine piece of art being hung in someone's home or a fast food restaurant compared to a museum and how it effects someone's view on the significance of the piece. I think that this is a good and easy example to understand. If one were to walk into a McDonald's and glance over at a painting hanging over a booth, it would not be considered a masterpiece or something of great importance. When something is hung up in a museum where the main focus is to take a deeper look at and appreciate the art, it is put in a category of higher importance. I think that it has something to do with the different atmospheres and the purpose of hanging a painting on the wall. In McDonald's a painting is hung up to add decoration to the walls and give something for the customers to look at as they munch away at their french-fries. In a museum, the specific purpose is to appreciate the art and everything that it stands for.

Jerome Stolnitz talks about how someone's view of something being aesthetically pleasing is based on their attitude towards the object. He calls it the aesthetic attitude. He defines it as being "disinterested and sympathetic attention to and contemplation of any object of awareness or whatever, for it's own sake."Stolnitz states that his use of the word disinterested is crucial because it merely states that we are just looking at something to look at it and not trying to find an ulterior purpose. In other words we look at a painting and think it is nice looking because of our aesthetic attitude. I agree with Jerome Stolnitz and his theory on aesthetic attitude. Everyone has a different personality and experiences that cause them to take interest in a specific style or piece of artwork.

Marcia Eaton states something similar when she talks about someone's aesthetic veiw being different because of the time era and culture that they are living in. Different cultures have different perceptions and definitions of what is beautiful causing there to be differences in opinion. Someone from Europe and myself could be standing in a museum looking at the same painting. They could think that it was the most beautiful thing that they have ever seen and I could simply think that it was something that I would not even consider being artwork. Eaton says that she believes something to be "aesthetically pleasing" when it arouses feelings of delight. If you enjoy the painting, it is aesthetically pleasing to you.

Overall, I agree with what the authors were saying about how something is looked at as being aesthetic pleasing when it brings delight to someone but can vary greatly over cultural and time boundaries and the specific setting that the art is viewed in.

Questions
1. What is aesthetic appreciation?

2. What are some of the characteristics of things that different people could find something aesthetically pleasing?

3. What differences is culture could cause aesthetic differences?