English Literature Essays Beauty Truth Art

English writings Essays dish aerial Truth Art hit Truth ArtIn his famed apostrophe to the Grecian Urn, the immortal poet, John Keats, wroteThou shalt remain, in midst of opposite woeThan ours, a friend to man, to whom thou sayst, sweetie is right, truth watcher,that is bothYe know on e contrivanceh, and all ye need to know.This genuinely noteworthy statement on Beauty and Truth and their interchangeability poses a precise important disbelief in the postmodern era. Art and its convention of the Beauty/Beautiful has imperceptibly changed over the decades, from something that should reflect the Ideal (and in reality, doubly removed from it, as per Plato), or in essence complete and go pleasure to the senses to something, that expresses the unique consciousness/angst of the creator. Art has thus rediscovered its definition for mantrap.If viewer is truth, then it may dare to be grievous too, for truth may be harsh or horrific. Beauty does not suggest something fine in t he actual sense of the term, and that, which comes closer to the true expressions of the egotism and the vision of a generations psyche, that is fragmented, kitsch- manage, entangled and beyond the metanarratives of a suffocating conformity. Beauty has evolved into a freedom for expression. Contemporary craft, especially questions the paradigms of artistic values, with artists like Chapman Brothers or Justin Novak producing fine art that are clearly meant to provoke reactions and argufy judgements of beauty, that had its roots in Kants Critique of Judgment (1790).It contemplated on the pure aesthetic experience of art consisting of a disinterested observer, please for its own sake and beyond any utility or deterrent exampleity. Now, the very word pleasing may have different boundaries and contemporary art is trying to escalate their claims. If Marcel Duchamp made a fountain issue of a urinal in 1917, that hurtled the Dadaist movement and that later amplified into a surrea list tendency facial expression into primitive art for their subconscious inspiration, to reveal the psychic process, then the native motivation behind the exclusively thing was subversion.If primitivism was motivating a in the raw dimension by which beauty of the mind was revealed, then Picasso solely playing areaified art and personal experience into a fourth dimension and make believed a cubist movement to claim a break down of a canon that no longer held on to techniques, symbols and least of all prevalent criteria for judging anything. There are many socio-ideological forces behind the egosame(prenominal) and the pernicious World Wars had many reasons to question the notions behind the traditional mentation of Beauty, and it turn to the subjective, transcendental and alienated psyche of modern man. Metaphysical hopelessness gave path from absurdity to beauty, while the meaninglessness of this Being, made beauty take care more akin to chimerical, either by derisi on or by the light of their tragic truth.What makes the question more intriguing is that, whether contemporary art has found a better form of beauty (constructed to please and create a certain discursive paradigm) in the grotesque, since it frees us from any moral and political/ideological constraints? Can it be linked to greater dimensions of teleological magnitude, or should it be treated as an alternative method of agreement true aesthetic, if not the complete aspect of aesthetic itself? Is grotesque affirmable without the knowledge of Beauty itself?I shall attempt to answer the following questions that I raised, with a few examples. One must first understand the idea behind perception and the dialogical force that surrounds it. If the world is raised as an conjuring trick in geniuss mind then the mind has been symbolically trained to read it as a language. This matrix of complex spontaneousness is paradigmatically and syntagmatically (Roman Jakobson, 1987) being challenged, when monstrous plays the part of Beauty. The Dystopia arises out of a shattered prototype that must restructure itself to include elements of the grotesque within the beauty, and reach towards the same aesthetic experience the sublime. alone interestingly what produces sublime is shock. except one must not confuse this with the cathartic experience of the Tragic mildness and terror, but something quite opposite to an archetype communicative situation that all such art produces. olibanum this element of mimesis and/or representation of the ideal have given way to an infinite subjectivity (Hegel, Lectures on graceful Art, given in the 1820s), or the abyss of the human mind and condition. But the self is interpellated as per Lacan and later Althusser too estimated the impossibility of a atomic number 53 position from where one can judge, since the self was preconditioned with a mint candy of logocentricism (Derrida), which are again socio-culturally specific as per Barthes. Th us there is a complete inquiry into art with the artists personality or self (or selves).Justin Novaks disfigurine often conforming to the bourgeoisie values, distort them to such an wry extent that one cannot miss the counter realism that it adjures. Often it serves to offer no alternative reality, but just launches one amidst a grotesque re-examination of old values and with its attendant disillusionment. Once the silent barrier amidst class and gender is dismantled, the escape is into nothingness the sublime height of bulky unending problems, and this underscores the definite presence and the horrors of undying conformism.If truth is beauty, then Novaks art works reveal the finer sides of it by shattering the well-provided and compartmentalized pattern processes with which one can aspirationify art from a safe distance. The grotesque closeness of these truths, give beauty to the mind by releasing it from the shackles of labor movement and overpowering illusions. Truth i s not universal, but a power to tackle the inextricable complexity of human behaviour, mind and his/her interrelationship with their sociable, cultural and diachronic environment. With Novaks work one is left to ponder these very questions. Is Grotesque a rebellion? Or is it an inextricable element of beauty?Grayson Perrys ceramic works portray this polemic, further, by making them superficially ravishing (as beauty has been notoriously claimed to have been) and underneath it remains the darker motives of an artist who tries to wrest with disturbing truths (or shall one call them home truths, with a larger social back drop to them) that question issues of public/private dialectic. His works that be mention here are, culmination Out Dress 2000, Weve Found the torso of your Child 2000or the Boring Cool People 1999 (reminds one of Eliots famous lines from The Love rime of J. Alfred Prufrock In the room the women come and go, lecture of Michaelangelo).Not only does he deal with issues like cross-dressing, child abomination and social sterility ( most spiritually hollow cool fashionistas or the demanding personnel of the utilitarian age), but also, he plays with this abnormal interrelation between beauty and grotesque. He raises questions about taste and the sublime. In short he subverts the notion of beauty with beauty that is skin deep Grotesque thus becomes Beauty that is kin deep in this works Reality is a unhallowed faade and Perry questions whether hegemony denotes or connotes the medium of taste in art.Thus equate expression with grotesque beauty beyond the limited categories of high or low taste, his avant-garde expressionism becomes a solitary modicum of aesthetic experience, which is new and which is whole (if whole comprises of an aesthetic stance that offers no definite and certain arrangement of arts end but generates a range of testy/shocking possibilities of that, which is an illusion in itself Bourgeois ideology).Figure 1 Coming Out Dr ess, 2000. He poses as Claire, his feminine alter ego. All his works deal with these two sides to his sexuality quite deeply, especially in cross-dresser Brides of Christ 2000 and Contained Anger1999, respectively, that questions the significance of male-role models. But what is interesting is that Perry is experimenting with representation, rather then pottery, and that is why his artwork combines issues of an innocent observer or rather tries to destroy the comfortable distance with which an observer may guard their subjective billets.Transvestite to transgression, the Chapman Brothers question the inevitability or orthodox value of canonical (classical) artworks. This travesty or mockery of canonical lofty seriousness is reflected in their works, through devises of defaced and rack figures, which for them amount to the complete picture of Beauty (of an era that is grotesque, in its realization of a past, present and future that cannot bear to sift through the beastly side of so cio-cultural conditions, anymore or unlike the others). This becomes a subject behind their sculptures that bursts with mockery, tragedy exploding with grotesque farce.They usher in a new experiment with taste, bad taste and the notions of good taste. Art moves into the realms of public or mass low category, which becomes an essential democratic medium for evoking or carrying advancing a provocation to rouse the sense of that horrifying answerless void. With the Chapman brothers there is a sadist tone attached to their insult or reiteration of Goyas order especially in their recreation of his Disasters of War, which inflict bold horror. But the grandeur of that horror is reduced to a trivial and yet a sardonic sensation taste comes off them.They twist the sensation of military group into an aesthetic ground and arouse a variety of physical and mental demands for perceiving Beauty amidst such a squandering grotesqueness. Beauty here lies in the release from holding back appreciati on, awe and complete shock. Violence does not stand-alone and nor does any other human emotion. Sex, 2003 is thus desire, decay, diabolical, deliberate, freedom or defeat. Purity is not that far from its pornographic mockery of it and they are unified in their apparent verisimilitude.A true representation of kitsch art, their works like Fuckface and Zygotic Acceleration, roused shock as they attempted to portray the sexualisation of children due to the media and increase gender awareness. These treatments nevertheless push questions about morality that grotesque beauty actually challenges. Thus morality and beauty in its aesthetic substantial forwardedness seem to flatten out newer boundaries of experiences, which the Chapman brothers challenge through their craftsmanship.Traditional Sculpture, especially in the hands of the Chapman Brothers and Justin Novak or Grayson Perry are objects of anti-canonical parody, grotesque imitations or thought-provoking reverse-discourses. All th ese postmodern artists are challenging aesthetic experience. All these artworks accede to one the power of the grotesque that sublimates beauty with its truth, and they make us determine that truth is not about a fixed standard, but evaluate the actual absence of it.What makes contemporary art more beastly in its beauty is the power to derive happiness (or sado-masochist satisfaction) out of this grotesqueness. The grotesque shocks but this is a pleasure in itself, because it is the very representation of the consciousness. Theatre and artwork met with experimentalism in the stage by Artaud, who made audience a viewer to cruelty that is harsh, exceptionally brutal and yet beautiful. By shattering disaffection and by creating something that allows no objectivity (in the likes of Kant or Brecht) Artaud demands a complete intimacy of the senses. Moreover, this is where art threatens to change the soul of the perceiver by its dominating beauty, which horrifies the perceiver with i ts verity and unique angst.Wittgensteins concept of seeing-as, allows contemporary art to toss master narratives completely and standout on their own purely as opthalmic sensations. From British Avant-Garde art that confuses common and the uncommon (like use of framework by Chapman Brothers or genitals replaced by the faces in their remake of Goyas Disasters of Wars series). Grotesquerie is about questioning the status quo, about unflinching self-criticism and about embracing outsiders. From Simon Carroll deconstructing the chronology of ceramic vases with his pastiches like Thrown Square Pot2005, engages the observers mind with complex questions that he poses through the irregular construction of his surfaces.The artists seem to dwell on the apparent hyperreality of contemporary situation, where art has become a vastly reproduced object fractured beyond identity. Formlessness becomes the beauty without symmetry and deliberate cruelty an aesthetic grotesqueness. Thus the gap be tween what is apparent and what may actually exists gives the artists ample space to bridge this defined categories with crushing forces of expressions that though grotesque to the shocked senses is in the end beautiful by virtue of its truth.Works CitedEliot, T. S The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock. Eliot, Thomas Stearns. Prufrock and Other Observations. London The Egoist, Ltd, 1917 Bartleby.com, 1996. www.bartleby.com/198/. 30.01.2007. ON-LINE ED. Published May 1996 by Bartleby.com Copyright Bartleby.com, Inc. (Terms of Use).Hegel, Lectures on hunky-dory Art, (edited by Hotho) Aesthetics Lectures on Fine Art, Vol. 1.translated by T. M. Knox, 1973. http//www.marxists.org/reference/archive/hegel/works/ae/contents.htm 30.01.2007.Jakobson, Roman. Language in Literature. Ed. Krystyna Pomorska and Stephen Rudy. Cambridge, MA Belknap, 1987Kant, Immanuel The Critique of Judgement (1790), translated by Meredith, J. Adelaide ebooks, 2004Keats, John. Poetical Works. London Macmillan, 18 84 Bartleby.com, 1999http//www.bartleby.com/126/41.html. 29.01.2007 Online-Ed beginning(a) published February 1993 published July 1999 by Bartleby.com Copyright Bartleby.com, Inc.