Appreciation of Literature and Film 2

by Macie Harkovich

No artist has ethical sympathies. An ethical sympathy in an ethical is an unpardonable mannerism of style.

All art is at once surface and symbol. 

     I disagree with this aphorism in the sense that Oscar Wilde is saying that artists are not ethical and should not have a conscience with good morals. Rather, it is surprising to see an artist portrayed this way. In the book, Dorian Gray exemplifies this aphorism well. His obsession with surface beauty leads him to become quite selfish and narcissistic towards his youthful looks.

     In contrast with Dorian’s view, some songwriters in our modern day write songs from their own experience, which are used to teach or inspire others. One song that really stands out to me is “Ain’t No Mountain High Enough,” by Marvin Gaye and Tammi Terrell. To me, this song depicts the idea that whatever happens, no matter the size of the mountain, there is no reason to worry or give up; so there is no obstacle that can get in your way to stop you from reaching your goals. This contrasts Wilde’s view that art should not have a moral ethic or stance. 

     If this song were to be about aestheticism and was simply examined at a surface level, one would simply listen to this song and comment only on its beauty. Rather, when people hear this song, they feel motivated that anything in life is possible. In general, I feel like songwriters who have ethical sympathy write songs that typically make the listener want to feel that same way. For instance, I listen to a lot of songs while I workout and run, and many of them are by various artists; a majority of the songs are meant to inspire and fuel my workout. For instance, I listen to some songs by Taylor Swift who draws inspiration from her relationships and personal experiences, which clearly goes against the idea that artists have no ethical sympathies. 

     The next aphorism that I chose is similar, stating that art should only be observed at its surface. I personally do not agree with this statement, and can cite an example from the Halsey Institute of Contemporary Art which includes the art by La Vaughn Bell. In her exhibit, she looks at the relationship between history, land, and the bodies between them as she shows work from the Lowcountry scenery. She also has work inspired from the tropical storms of the Caribbean; her work shows how the people who live there are resilient against the storms, showing the relationship between land, water, and the violence that harms the land and its people.  

     I mean, it is pretty clear that Bell’s work is beautiful, but the viewer has to dig deep and figure out the story of the art to understand that it is beautiful. So I would argue that simply looking at art and the way it looks is not the correct way to perceive art, but peeling back each layer of a painting or sculpture is what makes one appreciate art better. I would argue that finding the deeper meaning in art makes one have a better connection with the piece and therefore an appreciation for its beauty. 

Diversity of opinion about a work of art shows that the work of art is new, complex, and vital.

I agree with this aphorism strongly. I think that this is very true because the world around us is only affected by art when it brings about new ideas and emotions. If a form of art has been seen or viewed many times before it doesn’t make the viewer or listener feel any differently than they did before so it will never flourish more than the original art it followed. New art is also very vital because without it society can’t make advancements in culture or freedom. Art lets people express how they feel and understand it, so without new art we would all be stuck in one way of feeling or thinking. I think this aphorism can be shown through the example of singer Elvis Presley. Elvis Presley started presenting his art in a time when rock and roll music was never really seen before in his environment. Many people had differing opinions about his music and it stirred up a lot of controversy at first. People thought it was too bold and inappropriate while other people loved the new dancing and music he was bringing to the table. All his songs and dance moves were so new and unique that people didn’t have a predisposed view of it already. Because his songs were complex and different it forced people to discover their own emotion and feelings that it brought out within them. Eventually Elvis ended up changing the music industry and different parts of society, but this was not without rejecting opinions. We think of Elvis now as an icon or a trendsetter in music but it took some time for that to be seen. Any artist who throws a completely new form of art into the world will have to deal with the negative backlash or words from its audiences before it is actually understood for how creative it is.  His art was able to bring forward a new sense of individuality and expression that had never been seen before and he wouldn’t have been able to accomplish this without stirring up some differentiating opinions by his audience. It is so vital or important that we have artists in the world like Elvis because without it we would see no change in the world around us. We need these types of artists and art to not become a homogeneous thinking society because without it we would not see or feel the unique aspects of ourselves displayed around us. It would force us to all be replicas of each other and would diminish creativity and self. It’s very easy to see the connection between this aphorism and Elvis Presely once explained but I bet if you look into any artist you admire you will see when they first presented their art to the world it probably wasn’t admired by all and that is what truly makes them an artist.

All art is at once surface and symbol.

Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril.

Those who read the symbol do so at their peril.

It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors.

By Madison Grover

Harry Styles is a public figure/musician who has been known to be pretty vague on the exact meanings of the music he writes. He never tells exactly what his songs mean and lets the interpreter gather their own story or develop their own opinions on what they think the song is about. For example, Two Ghosts by Harry Styles is thought to be written about Taylor Swift, he mentions “same lips red, same eyes blue”, many fans think he wrote this about his ex-girlfriend, Taylor Swift. Taylor Swift has blue eyes and tends to wear red lipstick. The two were a phenomenon in late 2012 to early 2013. This is a surface-level analysis made by many fans. He has never addressed the true meaning of the song or if he wrote it about her.

Many fans obsess over the two artists which can lead them to compare little details about them. They aren’t forced to do so but do it because it brings some sort of joy or entertainment to them. Another example related to Harry is his song “Sweet Creature”. Many fans suspect the song to be about a specific person but he does not reveal who it is about. He likes for fans to develop their own meanings. He also does not like to mention who his songs are about so the listeners don’t have a tainted point of view while listening.  His creation of these songs without exact meanings helps fans stay focused and maintain interest in his music. Fans going beneath the surface to find meanings to songs can be a great thing. They allow the artist to maintain fame and earn music streams in the process. As long as fans keep their viewpoints respectful, creating meaning in artists’ songs should be seen as okay. Having an ominous vibe to his music keeps things interesting. An example that is close to me is the song called “Cherry” by Harry Styles. I don’t relate to every lyric in the song but it spoke to me during its release. When I listen to it, it reminds me of my life and the way I was when it was my favorite song. I made the title of the song a part of my fashion. I would buy cherry-designed socks, pencil cases, earrings, etc. I wanted it to be known that cherries were my thing and “Cherry” was my song. Granted, I was around 15-16. I don’t think about who he wrote it for or what it meant to him. I think about how it made me feel in the moment and all the memories surrounding the song. This sort of matches “it is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors”. I do believe that art can mirror life as well. Many portraits/paintings can be of people, landscapes, buildings, etc. Those are all a part of life and mirror peoples day to day lives. The quote is a double-entendre. Art can mirror the spectator but art can also mirror life as well.

By: Alyssa Brunner

      The aphorism, “Those who find beautiful meanings in beautiful things are the cultivated. For these there is hope,” was the initial phrase that stood out to me. Within this, there are several things to unpack. To begin, I will say that I agree with it. Something about the aphorism sparked my creative side and I really resonated with it. When I originally read it, I thought of the quote, “With freedom, books, flowers, and the moon who could not be happy,” by Oscar Wilde. In my eyes, all art, or rather all things, are beautiful in one form or another. Whether tragic, empowering, devastating, etc. I believe there is a touch of beauty in any piece of creativity, which is just about everything. This can even be applied to real life scenarios as well. In a way, I think of it as “romanticizing” a situation, or rather, being optimistic. It could also be viewed as not taking things for granted, and having gratitude. For example, I thought of this as you’re watching a beautiful sunset and don’t pay much attention because, well, sunsets occur all of the time. Rather, using this aphorism, you would recognize and embrace the beauty of the moment, and realize you actually will not get it again, and it’s unique down to the millisecond in which you are experiencing it. When you think of everything in this way, you’re bound to be happier and filled with gratitude. We so easily take for granted the ordinary beauty that is surrounding each and every one of us everyday.  Another example, would be looking at a piece of art that is widely known to be “good”, such as The Starry Night, so you pay little attention to what’s in front of your eyes. To embrace this aphorism, you would do just the same as the sunset and recognize the true beauty, the dedication it took to create, the privilege you have to be seeing it, etc. The aphorism above that was, “Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault.” I also agree with this phrase. When relating to a real life example, you can see why. If someone points out a negative in a once positive scene, it is corrupt. Such as pointing out a flawed brush stroke in a painting. It “poisons” a once existing great thing or ideal. This is an extremely critical philosophy, and seems to be a reflection of the one doing the criticizing. 

By Juliet Pantoulis

“Those who find beautiful meanings in beautiful things are cultivated.”

I disagree with Wilde on this statement as I actually believe the opposite; I think that if someone is only able to find beauty in things that are explicitly beautiful they are not looking deep enough. Only a cultivated eye educated in art is able to find art in everything. Making art of beautiful things may be aesthetically appealing but can often be incredibly surface-level. Exploring the beauty in all things, aesthetic or not, provokes conversation regarding the nature of beauty itself. Many cultivated artists find beauty in death, which is typically a morbid subject but artists romanticize the finite nature of it and explore the implications of death on relationships, love, and religion.  In the song In a Week by Hozier, he speaks about love after death through decomposition: 

“And they’d find us in a week

When the weather gets hot

After the insects have made their claim

I’d be home with you

I’d be home with you”

Decomposition is an ugly process but he turns the story about his decay into a love song. He uses the lyrics to describe how they will be together past death:

“We lay here for years or for hours

Your hand in my hand

So still and discreet

So long we become the flowers

We’d feed well the land

And worry the sheep”

The writing is almost gothic, going to extremes about love and death to express passion. The notion of loving someone so much that you wish to be with them past death, through the ugly process of decomposition illustrates a deep, all-consuming love. He uses multiple double entendres to sex and death to further express this passion. Love is often spoken about as if it is going to die with death but Hozier contests this belief. Death is painted as peace, a place of rest. He finds the art in the process of decay, the grass, animals, and earth are all alive and part of a whole that they will return to after death. Instead of speaking of heaven as the final resting place he finds peace in the earth, our place of inevitable return. He does not speak of heaven or another afterlife because to lay at rest on earth with his lover is heaven enough. This view of death is not uncommon in many works of art, this song in particular makes me think about Romeo and Juliet (which I find interesting that this was the play used within Picture of Dorien Gray) where two people love each other so much that they both end up dying to be together. The picture of Dorien Gray deals with morbid topics and speaks about things that are not beautiful. Death is a morbid subject but according to Wilde “No artist is ever morbid” so this leads me to question whether Wilde feels death is a morbid topic or if he exempts the topic of death from morbidity. 

by Kai McKoy on October 13 2023

All art is at once surface and symbol. Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril.

Above is a quote from Oscar Wilde, a controversial poet and novelist, enticing the audience to this foreign concept of art and its lack of any real meaning. Throughout his piece of literature, The Picture of Dorian Gray, the idea of art is debated. I believe that most art has meaning. In this case, I can’t entirely agree with Wilde’s statement that art has no meaning and is ultimately not supposed to have any profound sense but rather just to be a pretty thing to look at. I think that mindset strips away the piece’s purpose and uniqueness, and “just being pretty” loses attraction because it doesn’t hold any substance or attachment. Wilde also goes on to say that those who look for the meaning of a painting do so at their own “peril,” as if the viewer is straining themselves or torturing themselves to find meaning in something that simply doesn’t mean anything.

Again, I’m afraid I have to disagree with that bold statement.

When I read this quote for the first time, I was taken aback as I thought of many famous painters who painted during a time of a historical crisis, who told stories through their art, or even put a non-verbal autobiography into their piece of artwork; it all holds meaning. I think of two particular artists when I read this quote. One is the famous painter of the Post-Impressionist movement, Vincent Van Gogh. Based on my art history knowledge,  Vincent Van Gogh was a struggling man. He dealt with mental adversity and went through a period of depression that was reflected in his art pieces that we know now as the “Blue Period” starting from 1883 and ending with his life – which can also be analyzed for a deeper understanding of his works. In these works specifically, he uses monochrome colors of various shades of blues to showcase his depressive state and unique brushstrokes; according to Wildes, this simple change of artistic palette symbolized nothing, but to the artist, it tells his mental state and his outlook on his own life.

Another artist I thought of was American artist Thomas Hart Benton, a well-renowned painter during the Great Depression/ Harlem Renaissance period. Benton would produce massive murals showcasing the livelihood of working-class individuals during the Great Depression, followed by a panorama display of all the Harlem Renaissance entertainments- as if it played a massive distractor of the current suffering Americans were facing. Art Historians could analyze this depiction of art and find the broader context of how people lived during that period, what other events co-occur, and how they all affected one another. According to Wilde, would Benton’s artwork be meaningful? Would it lead me to my peril to find it meaningful? Or is it just a pretty mural without any meaning or historical storytelling? Agreeing to those questions would be disrespectful and ignorant to ignore all signs posing how much artwork is more than just a picture of a subject. 

“There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all.”

I think this has a lot to do with what is going on in the world right now, and I can see both sides. I do think that books that come across as inappropriate or offensive where just poorly written, because I think that the reason people write books is to spread information, not to make other people angry. Then another part of me also believes that the best books are the ones that do ignite a feeling inside you. The books that I remember the most are the ones that made me cry or laugh or really mad. I think that it is important to talk about hard things in stories, and if you can’t handle it then don’t read it. I know there is a lot going around with book banning right now, because parents and teachers are getting into fights over what the kids should be allowed to read and while I understand a parent wanting to protect their child, a lot of what they want to protect them from is stuff they will have to learn at some point.

Rachel Reid

“ Those who find beautiful meanings in beautiful things are the cultivated. For these there is hope”

“ It is the spectator and not life that art really mirrors”

In reference to the first aphorism, I agree with it because being able to fully appreciate and enjoy good things is a blessing, that not everyone has. There are the glass half full and glass half empty people. Some people would see a rainy day and be mad at the world for the rain, while others would thank the earth for the rain and enjoy it. Like the saying, some people dance in the rain others just get wet. This made me think of the song “Home” by Edward Sharpe and the Magnetic Zeros. The song is about two people in love, calling their partner home. They acknowledge how beautiful it is to have a person who feels at home. The song mentions following their partner anywhere, and how much better they feel when they are with their partner.

In reference to the second aphorism, I also agree with it. Everyone brings their own experiences and perspectives when they look at art, so the same piece could have different meanings for everyone. Thinking about the roles that perspective plays in how we view different subject material makes me think about Cat’s Cradle. I had never read Vonnegut before and at first, I was so confused by his writing style. Now that I understand that he is being ironic it makes sense. I read this book in my FYE and when we had discussions I disagreed with all my classmates on the true meaning. Everyone did because we all have different perspectives before and while reading Vonnegut. Connecting back to the aphorism, the way I understood this material could be different from Vonnegut’s intention. This could be applied to almost everything in life, especially music. Growing up I hated country music, so if someone was playing it I automatically didn’t like them. Now that I’ve explored different genres of music and gained a different perspective, I see the genre differently. This is also applicable to specific songs, like “Under the Boardwalk” by The Drifters. To most this is a happy song, singing about a pretty day at the beach. But it makes me sad because that was my mimis favorite song. When I listen to that song I don’t feel happy, I just remember singing it with her which makes me sad. I am the spectator, and the song is a mirror of myself because of my previous experience with the song.

“Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault.”

The aphorism that stood out to me the most in Wilde’s novel was, “Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault.” This aphorism stood out to me mainly because I strongly disagree with it. I believe that everyone has a different perception on what is defined as “ugly”, therefore, I think that there is no such thing as an ugly meaning. If someone paints an image of a butterfly, for example, some people may see butterflies as beautiful creatures, whilst others may think the opposite. I do not think it would be a ‘fault’ to have a different viewpoint than other people, not everyone thinks the same, and that is completely normal. It all depends on the person. In addition to this, everyone’s idea of beauty differs as well. A piece of literature that really reminds me of this aphorism is Franz Kafka’s, The Metamorphosis, which is a story about a young man who finds himself transformed into a giant insect one morning, changing his life from that point on in an extremely negative way. The way people view this story is quite different, some see it as a story about mental illness—like I see it as, because of the way the main character’s relationship with his family goes downhill because of his sudden transformation, and others see it as a story about an actual insect just being silly, instead of it being a metaphor for the more bleak theme of mental illness. I personally do not see an issue with people viewing it in a more lighthearted manner, that does not mean this is a fault, it just means that not all of us see things in the same way. Although the difference with my example and the aphorism chosen is that The Metamorphosis is not typically seen as a ‘beautiful’ piece of literature, it is seen as a more unserious and silly piece by some individuals, I can still connect this piece of literature with Wilde’s aphorism, and I can use this story to support why I personally disagree with the aphorism of “those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. This is a fault.”

Diversity of opinion about a work of art shows that the work is new, complex, and vital. 

The above aphorism from the Preface of The Picture of Dorian Gray claims that art that causes disagreement among critics is new, complex, and vital. The rapper and musician Tyler the Creator exemplifies this aphorism, namely his first two solo albums Goblin and Wolf (and to a vastly lesser degree his third album Cherry Bomb.) 

In the current music discussion, it is a rare opinion that Tyler the Creator’s most recent albums (Flower Boy, Igor, and Call Me if You Get Lost) are anything less than stellar. The instrumentals are beautiful, each album has a distinct compelling and emotional theme, the lyrics are honest and cutting, and there is a massive diversity of sound in each album’s catalog. However, this consensus is far from the norm in the history of Tyler’s music. A lot of his early music was/is considered by some audiences to be overly vulgar, homophobic, violent, lacking complexity, and badly produced. However other audiences, especially teenagers, found his music exciting, raw, unfiltered, and expressive in a way that few other artists did. The most notorious and divisive controversy is Tyler’s alleged homophobia cited by his regular use of the f-slur in his early music. The albums on trial, Goblin, and Wolf, were released in 2011 and 2013. The early 2010s were confusing times for artists. At the time, cancel culture was either in its infancy or soon to arrive, and as a result, audiences were beginning to hold artists accountable for prejudices presented in their work and personal lives. Also in the early 2010s, gay marriage was in the process of becoming nationally legalized so homophobic language gained significant attention from the public.

The reactions to Tyler the Creator’s music are emblematic of the division of opinion regarding media and the state of the nation’s views on homosexuality in the early 2010s. Lack of agreement among listeners demonstrates that Tyler’s work had a complexity that could be differently interpreted. The work can be seen as vital to understanding the infancy of cancel culture and early-2010s opinions on homophobic rhetoric. While there is little explicitly unique in these early albums the newness of the response to these works demonstrates that these albums were culturally significant.

I want to highlight the phrase “disagreement among critics.” A noticeable lack of agreement on the quality or importance of work tends to elicit polarizing responses. Something that is average rarely creates tension and disagreement; it is easier for critics to let average works be ‘just okay.’ Basic or simple art does not create discussion or argument. It is easy to oversimplify these groups as people who ‘get it’ and people who ‘do not get it,’ but that categorization often paints the group that ‘does not get it’ as only close-minded or conservative (which, admittedly, is sometimes the case.) However, in acknowledging the polarity of opinion regarding a piece, we can find the societal or personal reasons that generate the polarity and attempt to unpack what makes a specific work draw out these responses and, therefore, be new, complex, and vital. I also want to address, in the context of Tyler the Creator’s work, Wilde’s term critic can be replaced with the terms audience or listener because, since the onset of the internet, anyone with a Wi-Fi connection can be considered a critic.