After reading Hume and his theory about human taste I am starting to see what would make art, art. I know that I was the first one to talk in the class this year saying that the blue heart on stadium way was not art. I was being slightly facetious but I really did not see the artistic appeal to it either. However, after reading Hume, I really agree with his notion of taste. This notion is that each person has their own set tastes for all types of art. He writes that it is not necessarily composed of what you have studied or how one was brought up but rather, it is something that is uniquely inherent in each of us. He argues that when something strays far from our own taste, we look at it as “barbarous,” or crude and savage. Applying this even to everyday speech, there are jokes that while some find funny and tasteful, if they drift too far away from another’s taste, they will find the joke crude. This can also easily bee seen in movies and art. I know that when I went to go see an art exhibit in
Monday, February 2, 2009
Taste and Hume
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

Can taste mislead us? Dogs readily eat chocolate and antifreeze, killing them. Certain things do cause reactions in all of us, but what may taste sweet, may in reality be killing us. Could some form of art be our anti-freeze? Pornography, snuff films, the darker side of art, could it be slowly killing our humanity?
ReplyDelete