On Sat, 22 Mar 1997, malgosia askanas wrote:
> John wrote about Nietzsche:
>
> > Later on, he claims that "it is only as an aesthetic phenomenon that
> > existence and the world are justified" (_Birth_, Section 5, p. 52).
> > [...]
>
> > ... if we put the stress on "justified," does he mean that we only get to
> > the point of accepting the world, of considering it justified, when it is
> > tarted up as an aesthetic phenomenon?
>
> Heh heh, what a wonderful topic. So I would question this idea of "tarting
> up". What do you see this "tarting up" as consisting of? To me, it seems
> that to regard existence and the world as _justified_ is already, ipso facto,
> to regard them aesthetically -- because the "justification" flows out of
> an act of sensemaking, of regarding things as interconnected.
On tarting up: I see this as consisting of the various myths and stories
we give ourselves to make things seem just, or to make them seem exciting
or worthwhile or purposive.
I see your point: "justification flows out of an act of sensemaking" and
so that's already aesthetic.
Do you think N is prescribing or describing? It seems to me he (and he
shares this with his pupil, Foucault) is constantly on the border between
these two modes. Here's the prescription reading: "It's really only as an
aesthetic phenomenon that the world is justified, so we must do better and
produce more aesthetic phenomena!" Here's the descriptive reading: "Being
the kinds of creatures we are, the world only appears justified to us when
it is draped in lovely outfits and fitted out with lots of pretty
stories."
To me,
> Nietzsche's statement is a kind of tautology -- it says more about his
> understanding of the word "aesthetic" than about anything else. I would
> argue that in this understanding, the operation of "tarting up", or
> aesthetization, would have to be viewed as a sign of corruption, of a deep
> sickening of the aesthetic sense.
>
> -m
>
I don't understand the last part. Here's the world: it's ugly, it's base,
it's hope-less. This is the point of the story of Silenus in Section 3 of
_Birth of Tragedy_. Midas hunts and finally captures Silenus and forces
him to answer the question: "What is best and most desirable of all things
for man?" Silenus answers: "The best and most desirable thing of all for
man is not to be." Midas asks for a second-best option. Silenus answers:
"To die soon." (See _BT_, Section 3, trans. Kaufmann, p. 42.)
That's the truth, but, as Nicholson so aptly phrased it (in "A Few Good
Men") "we can't handle the truth." So we apply some rouge (life after
death!), some lipstick (sinners can be saved!), and so on. So tarting up
doesn't seem to be a corruption of the aesthetic sense to me. It seems
like this basic activity we engage in to adorn the world with as many
concealing flowing drapes and as many air fresheners as we can lay our
hands on.
--John
> John wrote about Nietzsche:
>
> > Later on, he claims that "it is only as an aesthetic phenomenon that
> > existence and the world are justified" (_Birth_, Section 5, p. 52).
> > [...]
>
> > ... if we put the stress on "justified," does he mean that we only get to
> > the point of accepting the world, of considering it justified, when it is
> > tarted up as an aesthetic phenomenon?
>
> Heh heh, what a wonderful topic. So I would question this idea of "tarting
> up". What do you see this "tarting up" as consisting of? To me, it seems
> that to regard existence and the world as _justified_ is already, ipso facto,
> to regard them aesthetically -- because the "justification" flows out of
> an act of sensemaking, of regarding things as interconnected.
On tarting up: I see this as consisting of the various myths and stories
we give ourselves to make things seem just, or to make them seem exciting
or worthwhile or purposive.
I see your point: "justification flows out of an act of sensemaking" and
so that's already aesthetic.
Do you think N is prescribing or describing? It seems to me he (and he
shares this with his pupil, Foucault) is constantly on the border between
these two modes. Here's the prescription reading: "It's really only as an
aesthetic phenomenon that the world is justified, so we must do better and
produce more aesthetic phenomena!" Here's the descriptive reading: "Being
the kinds of creatures we are, the world only appears justified to us when
it is draped in lovely outfits and fitted out with lots of pretty
stories."
To me,
> Nietzsche's statement is a kind of tautology -- it says more about his
> understanding of the word "aesthetic" than about anything else. I would
> argue that in this understanding, the operation of "tarting up", or
> aesthetization, would have to be viewed as a sign of corruption, of a deep
> sickening of the aesthetic sense.
>
> -m
>
I don't understand the last part. Here's the world: it's ugly, it's base,
it's hope-less. This is the point of the story of Silenus in Section 3 of
_Birth of Tragedy_. Midas hunts and finally captures Silenus and forces
him to answer the question: "What is best and most desirable of all things
for man?" Silenus answers: "The best and most desirable thing of all for
man is not to be." Midas asks for a second-best option. Silenus answers:
"To die soon." (See _BT_, Section 3, trans. Kaufmann, p. 42.)
That's the truth, but, as Nicholson so aptly phrased it (in "A Few Good
Men") "we can't handle the truth." So we apply some rouge (life after
death!), some lipstick (sinners can be saved!), and so on. So tarting up
doesn't seem to be a corruption of the aesthetic sense to me. It seems
like this basic activity we engage in to adorn the world with as many
concealing flowing drapes and as many air fresheners as we can lay our
hands on.
--John