Aesthetic Properties of the Art of Painting: Subjective or Objective?

entities, many other kinds of art, and even perhaps performances of abstract artworks, certainly have aesthetic properties. Conceiving of Aesthetic Properties A description of how aesthetic properties are conceived follows, through which it will be clear that there can be a full description of "how matters are" (concerning aesthetic properties) without anyone being able to definitely say whether aesthetic properties are subjective or objective. Thus, perhaps it does not matter, or, an answer may be that aesthetic properties have both subjective and objective aspects, which are perhaps even inseparable, at the same time.13 Let us take an example of a certain property which obviously is an aesthetic property. Certainly beauty seems to be par exellence an example of a property which is an aesthetic property, regardless of what it may truly be in fact.14 Besides beauty, which first comes to mind as an aesthetic property, when we speak about art and artworks, examples of other aesthetic properties are balance, symmetry, 10. Jerrold Levinson, Music, Art and Metaphysics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011), 63-88, 215-263. 11. Currie, An Ontology of Art. 12. David Davies, Art as Performance (Malden: Blackwell, 2004). 13. Perhaps we may say that "aesthetic" properties supervene at the same time, both, on mental and non-mental facts or properties. We can say, perhaps, when certain facts, both mentally and non-mentally obtain, then we have an aesthetic property realized. But I shall not pursue supervenience theory of aesthetic properties in any form here. About supervenience in artworks see for example Levinson, ''Aesthetic Supervenience.'' 14. For various theories of beauty see, for example, St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica, trans. Fathers of the English Dominican Province (Benziger 1947), 33, 270; Immanuel Kant, Kritika moći suđenja (Critique of Judgement) trans. Viktor Sonnenfeld (Naprijed: Zagreb, 1976), 45-50; Nick Zangwill, The Metaphysics of Beauty (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, 2001). Vol. 6, No. 1 Pećnjak: Aesthetic Properties of the Art of Painting... 74 elegance, gracefulness, and unity.15 Of course, there are still other valuable aesthetic properties. Each of these properties may pose a problem for itself – it can be asked what it is in fact and what it is in relation to other aesthetic properties. There is no need to analyze in detail the specificity of each aesthetic property and various possible specific realizations of each property. On the other hand, of course, it will be necessary to say something about some property, but it is not necessary to go into depth for each property. The primary aim of this text is to examine some basics concerning relations of various aesthetic properties. In doing this, by necessity we must also examine and consider the relations aesthetic properties have to other properties which are not aesthetic. There are two ways of examining: top-down and bottom-up. It may be, for example, stipulated that beauty is the highest aesthetic property an artwork may have, and we may struggle to see in a downward way what (stipulated) beauty consists of. We could also take ordinary properties of art objects qua objects like any other object in our world and try to see how these properties build up or are put together to embrace or constitute properties of the kind we call "aesthetic" properties. Of course, both ways, if possible, should come to the same conclusion, especially if there is a unique construction of the relations of ordinary properties and "aesthetic" properties. Here, "unique" should not be taken literally, meaning "only one" or "just a small number," but only logically or explanatory – that there can be a coherent way to explain and relate various kinds of properties as simply as possible. This way can be even generic in the sense that it could allow aesthetic properties, or at least some of them, to be realized in a multitude of ways. This is a potential advantage of such an explanation, because many different artworks are considered beautiful. Therefore, it seems that beauty can be achieved, concerning individual artworks, in various ways, but something seems to be characteristic and shared between all those individual manifestations. If explanation should be generic, then some kind of underlying structure of achieving beauty should be common, and that structure should have a generic capability that would enable a multitude of individual concrete paths to achieving beauty (or any other aesthetic property). It should also to be such that we can demarcate those structures or entities which are beautiful from those which are not. It may be said for now provisionally, that beauty would be structure in the structure. That generic capability should be in 15. As examples for various approaches to aesthetic properties, see Frank Sibley, ''Aesthetic Concepts,'' in Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art, ed. Peter Lamarque and Stein Haugom Olsen (Malden: Blackwell, 2004), 127-141; Kendall L. Walton, "Categories of Art," in Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art, ed. Peter Lamarque and Stein Haugom Olsen (Malden: Blackwell, 2004), 142-157; Robert Stecker, Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield, 2010), 65-92; Peter Lamarque, "Aesthetic Empiricism," in Work and Object, ed. Peter Lamarque (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 122-138. Athens Journal of Humanities and Arts January 2019 75 fact something like a schema and should have an ability to generate certain aesthetic properties when appropriately filled with its elements. From the above, it can be provisionally concluded that the beauty of an artwork emerges from its having some other aesthetic properties laid out, combined and composed in a certain way. This leads to thinking that, if true, among other relations, there is a certain hierarchy of aesthetic properties. Again, if this is true, then it implies that there are "higher-order" aesthetic properties and more basic aesthetic properties. Further, some more basic aesthetic properties depend on certain arrangements of various non-aesthetic properties, and perhaps, not only on them, but also on psychological states and processes of experiences of artworks as well. By the hierarchy of aesthetic properties, we mean in ontological terms and not in terms of value. Taking painting as an example, a theory will be created about aesthetic properties considering this kind of art, but it seems that this could be extended, with necessary adjustments, to other kinds of art as well. If not, then at least it is applicable to painting, thus fulfilling the aim of this text, which is to show that, at least for the art of painting, there can be a full description of how aesthetic properties are realized without saying definitively whether they are subjective or objective. There can be, in fact, a case which enables us to say that aesthetic properties are complex composite entities, so their realization depends on simultaneously present subjectivity and objectivity. Architectonic of Aesthetic Properties That being settled, some kind of architectonic of properties for artworks in the domain of painting can be made. Using a bottom-up approach, the description begins with a basic fundamental layer that contains properties which are certainly and unproblematically non-aesthetic, i.e. they are some common ordinary properties of objects. First, there is some physical foundation on which the paint will be laid. It is usually a wooden plate, canvas or a wall (in the case of frescoes). There can be other kinds of foundations as well. Then, patches of colors are laid on the prepared foundation; some of the patches are so thin that we can consider them as lines (colored). It could be the case that basic drawing, as an elementary scheme, precedes putting the patches of colors. Colors can be, and often are, mixed and placed in layers in order to achieve various nuances, brightness and effects. After enough color is put down on a foundation, the painting is finished and it is let to dry. Of course, some amendments can be made afterwards but nothing essentially new happens. After the painting has dried, it can be shown to the public. What happens now, when the public is looking at the painting? Certain amount of photons fall on the painting; some wavelengths are absorbed, some Vol. 6, No. 1 Pećnjak: Aesthetic Properties of the Art of Painting... 76 reflected, and those that are reflected travel under normal conditions to the eye of the beholder.16 Light is refracted through the lens, falls on the retina and is transformed into the electrical impulses that travel through optical nerves further to the brain and, finally, cause states and processes in the various visual areas of the brain. We should add, because we are dualists, that these are a further cause of some non-physical mental states and processes, but nothing depends on this further claim; nothing we shall say here about hierarchy and the architectonic of properties, both aesthetic and non-aesthetic, depends on the dualist picture of the mind. Particular instantaneous sensations are integrated into a percept so they all combine to give a structured visual perception (of the painting). Ultimately, the beholder has a perceptive experience of the painting. Origin, Properties and Different Layers What are the origins of a painting? Of course, paintings are produced through complex intentional processes, using various physical processes, which consist in many subprocesses. Broadly speaking, these count as part of the history of production. Author(s), or in our case painters, use their various skills, knowledge and imagination in this intentional production of a work. It sounds simple, but it is not – indeed, there are rather complex relationships between these factors. Thus, it seems that there are many states and processes, both physical and psychological, of different levels and of different ontological characterizations