Expression Theory/Emotivism

‘Expression’ Theory Cloze:• says that _____ art work is not the material object before

you (paint on canvas, musical sound, words on the page etc) but an _______ emotion experienced by the artist which the work serves to _______ to its audience.

• The audience successfully experience the work when they recover the artist’s original experience in their own _________– Sad music does not so much make me really sad as enable me

to experience the original sadness as experienced by the artist.– R.K. Elliott: ‘the emotion is present in me but not predicable of

me’. • If the art works exists as the artist’s ______ emotion it

will be successful (and hence of value), if it allows me ________ to this emotion.

Direct access real emotion original (x2) communicate imagination

‘Expression’ Theory: Opened

• says that real art work is not the material object before you (paint on canvas, musical sound, words on the page etc) but an original emotion experienced by the artist which the work serves to communicate to its audience.

• The audience successfully experience the work when they recover the artist’s original experience in their own imagination.– Sad music does not so much make me really sad as enable me

to experience the original sadness as experienced by the artist.– R.K. Elliott: ‘the emotion is present in me but not predicable of

me’. • If the art works exists as the artist’s original emotion it

will be successful (and hence of value), if it allows me direct access to this emotion.

Is our response to art emotional?

• Art is intimately tied up with emotion– Good art is moving or otherwise captures a mood or

feeling. – We describe and appraise it using an affective

vocabulary.

• But how can psychological ascriptions normally attributed to persons apply to works of art?– Are such descriptions merely metaphorical?

• Whose emotion? – Is it really the artists’ self-expression we value?– or our own responses?

Background to Expressivism

• A version of this view first crops up in Plato’s Republic. He attacks the arts as promoting the emotions at the expense of calm rational analysis.

• Aristotle defends the importance of emotion in art though.

• Key recent figures: the Russian novelist Tolstoy (1828-1910), the Italian philosopher Croce (1866-1952) and the British Idealist R.G. Collingwood (1889-1943).

• Linked to Romanticism (key C18/19 pan-European artistic movement) but emotional qualities in art do need explaining anyway.

Fo’ and Agin

• This is a quick starter activity.

• Look at the sheet you’ve been given.

• Label each statement F or A…

For or against?

• B We often view the artist as especially emotionally sensitive, a person who has the capacity to convert their vivid inner experience into a publicly accessible work of art. The art work is a symptom of being an artistic soul.

For or against?

• C The ‘death of the author’ leaves the artist’s intentions out of consideration.

For or against?

• E Even if some works of art are best understood as expressions of feeling and emotion, this might have nothing to do with the artist’s feelings. Rather, the expressive qualities we value might inhere in the artwork, or else be the effects the artwork stimulates in us.

For or against?

• H The evaluation of art should restrict itself to focusing on the artwork itself and its intrinsic aesthetic quality.

For or against?

• I The intentions of the artist are often not known, but we can nevertheless appreciate the art. If so, it is implausible to claim the artist’s intentions must determine our appreciation of their work.

For or against?

• K When evaluating art we often consider whether it is a sincere, authentic, or genuine expression of the artist’s feelings towards the world around them. If it is, we tend to think the art work is more valuable because of it.

For or against?

• O Frequently artists intend to express their feelings and we should appreciate their art accordingly.

For or against?

• Q The causal origins of an art work are independent of the artistic product and as a matter of fact we have plenty of evidence showing that what or how strongly an artist happens to be feeling has no bearing on their capacity to produce even the most emotionally direct and intense work.

For or against?

• R The artist’s intentions are relevant in determining how we ought to judge their work.

For or against?

• T It is not obvious that all the art we value is emotionally expressive.

For or against?

• U Artistic production is not a kind of magical realisation of inner feeling and the artist’s feelings are not the issue. The judgements artists make in creating an artwork involve the studied application of genre-specific techniques onto a more or less recalcitrant medium, towards an evolving conception of the finished product - we appreciate the artist’s practical intelligence

Pair, share, put it out there

• Talk through the critique of emotivism/expressivism that you’ve been given.– Do you agree?– Is there a reply?

• You will explain this critique to us shortly…

Critiques: Art as (mere) vehicle.

• Croce and Collingwood are ‘idealist’ philosophers:

art work only exists as an ‘idea in the mind’. – So the public, physical art work is merely an

expendable vehicle. – Can the art work be separated from its

means of expression?

Critiques: The Ontological Question

– If the work of art is simply the artist’s original emotion…

– Where is the work of art? (the ontological question)

– …if it’s in the artist’s mind then it can exist without ever getting expressed

– …hopeless! (does this even make sense?)

Critiques: Only one correct response?

• Expressivism commits itself to the view that there can be only one correct response to an art work

• …namely recovering the original experience.

• But isn’t this too simplistic?

Critique:Sincerity? Intention?

• Tolstoy says art must express sincere (genuinely held) feeling.

• Yet it is quite possible to write a cheerful piece of music while feeling quite sad.– Mozart’s Clarinet Concerto is a very happy

piece of music– He wrote it at the end of his life, when he was

ill, depressed and very poor.– What is the original emotion to recover?

Critique:Original emotion unknown

• What of art where the original emotion cannot clearly be identified (e.g. ancient art)?

• What of art where the original emotion is mysterious or unclear (e.g. the Mona Lisa)?

• What of art where the original emotion was completely different to the one we now feel?

Critique: We respond to form

• Emotivism does not deal with the aesthetic emotion i.e. the delight that we take in the pure appearance of art works.

• We respond to the intrinsic formal qualities of some art work, not the emotion of the artist.

Critique:Some art makes us think

• Many works of art have a cognitive component which needs explaining.

• They are meant to make us think, not just feel.

• Conceptual Art is a good example of art that does this…

PEARL Paragraphs

• [Topic sentence]

• Point

• Exemplification or expansion

• Answer/ discussion point (and example)

• Rebuttal or counter ( + response)

• Link [back to topic]

• [Synthesis] or summary of paragraph argument

Issue:HOW does emotion occur?

• A key issue: emotivism owes us an account of how the emotion occurs.

• What is the connection between the artist, the emotion and the artwork? – Is it a causal connection?– Is some art intrinsically connected to

emotion?

Explanation/ Reasons For Reasons Against

Causal Theory

Intrinsic Thoery

How does emotion occur in art? Make grid pliz…

The Causal Theory of expression

• Emotion occurs in music because e.g sad composers write sad music which makes the listener sad.– C.P.E.Bach: ‘A musician cannot move others unless he too is

moved. He must of necessity feel all the effects that he hopes to arouse in his audience.’

• ‘Causal Chain’: – the artwork exists as a real emotion in the mind of the artist…– …and they cause the art (using artistic conventions)…– …which then causes the emotion in the mind of the audience.

• So because of the causal chain, the single correct response to an artwork (the artist’s original emotion) arises in the audience.

• The artist picks the means that provokes the emotion: they are simply a technician.

• But Mozart example…must the artist feel an emotion?

Some issues with the Causal Theory

• the emotion itself becomes the main focus of our attention…

• so, on this account, the art work itself (and also the artist’s cognitive intention) gets lost sight of.

• Form is erased by content: the art-work as vehicle becomes irrelevant.– How the emotion comes about is unimportant – that it

comes about is what matters. – Such a view also leads to a radical subjectivity about

what we should appreciate: Slayer is equal to Bach, Banksy to Vermeer etc, as they all cause strong emotions.

The ‘Intrinsic’ View of expression:

• Emotion e.g. sadness is in the art e.g. not imposed by an artist.• Frank Sibley: sadness is actually an expressive property of the

music itself • This avoids the ‘transmission’ problem of the causal theory of

expression.• A usual qualification is to say that emotion in art is

actually a ‘relational property’ - i.e. one that depends on an educated audience for its perception. – e.g If you know nothing about sadness and the tradition of the

music to which you are listening (e.g. 12 Bar Blues) then you won’t hear it.…A patient and a surgeon can both look at the same x-ray but won’t see the same things in it.

– Cultural background matters…as in this way we can explain why Bach is greater than Slayer.

– so we avoid a problem for the causal theory…elitism is saved.

Some issues with intrinsic emotions

• If expressive qualities really are intrinsic features of artwork, how can the same artwork occasion different responses in different perceivers?

• How are we to understand the ascription of psychological predicates to inanimate or non-human or non-alive things?– Metaphorically? (Is this a strong enough claim, then?)– Literally? (How can this be true, then?)

• On this account, such predicates are non-metaphorical– …sad art really is sad. – But surely only humans (and some animals) feel emotion?

Ascribing psychological predicates to art…?

• …we do call objects ‘sad’. We all acknowledge the existence of sad music (its chords, melody, halting rhythms)

• This sadness (unlike on the causal view) is inseparable from the music.

• There is some experimental evidence to link e.g. certain tones and chords to activity in the emotion centres of the brain.

More general problems with valuing art for its expressive qualities:

• Necessary and sufficient conditions:– Are there instances of art that are valued without being

expressive?– Are there examples of expression which are valued without

being artistic?

• Subjectivity, interpretation, transmission:– Whose emotion? – How do we know for sure we are feeling the right one?

• Elitism and the Cult of Genius– What if only certain individuals have the capacity to appreciate

art as it should be appreciated?– The causal expressivist may get round this, of course…

Assessment and Evaluation:

• What reasons might be provided for simply accepting this view?

• Could it be rescued by being modified? Is one version (the causal theory, the intrinsic theory?) better than another?

• What reasons might be provided for simply rejecting it?– Does the theory include enough? Is all art expressive? – Is it too inclusive? Are all expressive things artistic?

Exam Question – for next lesson.

(a) ‘This instrumental music expresses sadness.’ Suppose we agree it does: outline two reasons why this is philosophically puzzling. (15 marks)

b) ‘We value art because it expresses the artist’s feelings’ Consider what can be said both for and against this view. (30 marks)

Outline Plan

• How would you tackle this topic?