Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.65 AVERAGE
3.65 AVERAGE
At the finish of this book I am rewarded with a pleasant, meaningful sense of appreciation for the beautiful and an expansion of my knowledge of aesthetics and art history, my entire aim in reading it.
informative
reflective
slow-paced
Scruton works his way through a spectrum of ideas of beauty before settling on a very conservative one (surprise, surprise) but I did not find it a wholly satisfying or convincing thesis.
Not an easy read as I lack the detailed background in philosophy to follow all of his arguments. I found his discussion of pornography and erotic art particularly interesting and I will be applying some of these ideas to working with compulsive sexual behaviours in my practice as a psychologist. I will also move on to some of his other books. I'm in particular interested to read his critique of the left.
All the faults of Scruton's book can be explained by its title. In condensing his introduction to the history of aesthetics to a "very short" volume, he necessarily must leave a lot of questions unanswered about his premises. This leads to poetic but sweeping generalities about human sanctity and particularity, the pursuit of "a higher realm," and the rational foundations of aesthetic experience (to name a few) that beg for more detailed clarification. Of course, that clarification can only come at the cost of brevity. Which is probably frustrating to anyone who finds his arguments overly traditional. (Haven't we moved past being able speak about beauty's fundamental rationality? Aren't his strictures against pornography embarrassingly old fashioned?) Thankfully, I happen to share a lot of Scruton's theological premises (if not necessarily his Kantian ones), so reading this was a welcome relief from so many of the more thorough texts on aesthetics and ethics that I've been steeped in for the past few months. It is precisely what its title claims: a (very good) very short introduction to the idea of beauty.
Largely well put together, chapter seven felt out of place though for me, otherwise a fantastic defence of beauty as consolation.
'art answers the riddle of existence, it tells us why we exist by imbuing our lives with a sense of fittingness' (pg 108)
'art answers the riddle of existence, it tells us why we exist by imbuing our lives with a sense of fittingness' (pg 108)
Has some great ideas and I like the subject and philosophy but becomes a bit of a critique on a long list of high brow art, literature, opera, music, painting which doesn’t help the sense of superiority that comes across, which is itself discussed as part of the inevitable judgement within the question ‘what is beauty?’ Not intended irony because it’s clear in the end that in his opinion some art is more beautiful than others, and that there is objectivity, which I do agree with, even if he can’t define it, and I get irritated by his rather uncompromising attitude, which I admit won’t prevent me looking up some of his high art recommendations in an attempt to educate myself!
I both read and listened to the audio book of Roger Scruton's Beauty, A Very Short Introduction. Rarely has an author rubbed me in such the wrong ways. Here are four of the many:
1) In all the many dozens of works of art, music and literature he references, ALL ARE CREATED BY MEN! Hey, Roger, this is the 21st century. Wake up, pal;
2) Roger's language is 100% sexist - man, he, his throughout; not a she or her in the entire book;
3) Continually speaking of humans as "rational beings." I can appreciate we humans have reason and logic but I can't remember my last conversation with a "rational being." How about the emotions? the passions? the intuition? that part of the mind that goes beyond reason? (and, one could argue, where beauty in this world truly resides);
4) The more I read, the more it became clear to me Roger isn't a big fan of the human body, probably why there is not one reference to the beauty of dance - groups like Moscow Ballet, Pilobolus Dance Company or Cirque du Soleil. For me, some of the most beautiful experiences I've had have been watching such performances or participating in ecstatic dance workshops (Gabrielle Roth Dance, Philadelphia Group Motion, to name just two). Oh, the body in motion can be so, so beautiful!
I'm hardly alone in my assessment. Art critic Sebastian Smee speaks along similar lines in his Guardian review of Roger Scruton's book. Here are several juicy excerpts:
"John Updike thought that, for most men, a naked woman is the most beautiful thing they will ever see. He didn't say it was so for all men, nor did he venture an opinion on whether the reverse held for women. But the proposition, so bluntly delivered – as if centuries of hair-splitting philosophy and frenetic sublimation could be swept aside with one cheerfully ingenuous sentence – has always struck me as hard to refute.
Its implications – that our idea of beauty is linked to sexual selection and Darwinian evolution and that, as such, it is possibly quite banal – are firmly rejected by Roger Scruton in his new book Beauty. This is not an attempt to define beauty. Rather, it asks whether there are correct judgments to be made about it – reasons why we should prefer Titian's Venus of Urbino to Boucher's Blonde Odalisque or, indeed, to photographs of porn stars having sex. Framing the question in this way implies a search for standards. It also implies an attempt to link beauty with morality, which is no easy task.
The work of both artists (paintings of women by Velázquez and Rembrandt) is beautiful, but not, I think, in the rational sense Scruton champions, which depends too heavily on the more easily communicable concept of taste. In the end the most important question about beauty, to return to Updike's salvo, is whether it is special and profound or ubiquitous and really rather unremarkable. The art critic Peter Schjeldahl expressed a synthesis of these two possibilities when he wrote: "Beauty is, or ought to be, no big deal, though the lack of it is. Beauty presents a stone wall to the thinking mind. But to the incarnate mind – deferential to the buzzing and gurgling body – beauty is as fluid, clear, and shining as an Indian summer afternoon.
Roger Scruton has moments of great insight and clarity in this attractively slim volume, but he is less than deferential to the buzzing and gurgling body. He seems to find it distasteful. For him, beauty is not connected to animal joy, but to human reason. I'm not at all sure he has it right."
Thanks, Sebastian.
But I'll end my own review on a positive note. Roger's book does offer many insights on an entire range of subjects that will be particularly appealing for readers with a rich background in philosophy and the arts revolving around the European tradition. I especially enjoyed his reflections on the writings of David Hume, Théophile Gautier, Günter Grass and Clement Greenberg.
Everyone should read this that is serious about their approach to the question "What is beauty?". I think that the discussion on pornography is especially applicable today and answers a lot of the "why" concerning the ugliness of pornography. It is a short read, although a dense one, and is considered a more conservative philosophy, which I appreciated.
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced