In the hope of evoking a substantive response my question shall be in two, relatively unrelated, except as it applies to Bell, parts.
A popular criticism of Bell is that of elitism; it is not wholly unwarrented and it is entirely understandable. His prose is wrought with exclusionary language and rampant condescension. This runs the risk of embittering readers and tacitly encouraging to believe him despite any quality of his theory. The first part of question then is this: is Bell an elitist? Is elitism a fault of a theory? Can a theory be both elitist and correct? Where along the continuum of elitism does a theory become visciously elitist?
Bell is a formalist. His theory of art, a la Moore, is contentless. It is naught but the lines and colours, the forms and combination of forms, that stir our aesthetic emotion and thus render something art. Professor Johnson has already asked you to consider the relationship between significant form ans aesthetic emotion which will immerse you in his theory so I shan't repeat as such. On Bell's formalism, is he suggesting that we ought to divorce ourselves from content during appreciation, and is that possible? Are formalists correct to deny content?
I responded to your first question on my blog.
ReplyDeleteI responded to your second question on my blog.
ReplyDeleteClive Bell does, as we have discussed in class, completely ignore proper theoretical support. Elitism, in my opinion, is never truly a good thing to follow. Elitists are snobby, and condescend in most ways possible. When trying to prove things, such as in Bell's case, they often fog up their fortification by making vague remarks and faulty references. Based on Bell's essay, I would say that there's no way that his elitist writing can be refuted. Theories created by an elitist can be true and credible, but only if the writer can negate their elitist views for the duration of their essay.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Bell's ideas on form as well. His view from the essay is very close-minded and exclusive, and closes off correct artistic interpretation. If we are not to judge something based on its content, then we are judging based on the content we receive from it, which follows most aesthetic theories, but closes out his originality, and in my opinion, correctness. I believe we can't judge something in ostensibly objective terms without using content.
I responded to both of your questions on my blag.
ReplyDelete