RE: ontology and epistemology of aestheitics

["aaron leese" <aaronleese@hotmail.com>]

I think you meant semantic, not semiotic ...... and individual, not 
indivudual ...

and it is this whole string is more like asceticism than aesthetics (or 
aestheitics as in the subject)......

ps - do you know if they have finished the selection process for the bent 
festival ??  I put in an email and haven't heard anything .... so I'm 
wondering now.

ciao-
AL


>From: "samba -" <sambacomet@hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
>To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
>Subject: ontology and epistemology of aestheitics
>Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2007 00:57:18 -0800
>
>
>   I wish  more critics employed Kris's approach. I much prefer 
>statements 
>such as ,"I like x because it makes me feel x  to statements like,this is 
>good,this is crap ,you'll be happy if you buy this etc.
>   Without getting into semiotics,I see meanings and asthetics as tending 
>to have cultural elements that aren't purely subjective. In a culture 
>that 
>fetishizes individuality,and pushes the value of indivudual choice, as it 
>supports consumerism subjective aesthetics can be described as culturally 
>based.
>   I'm also interested in psychoacoustics,how the physical effects of 
>sound 
>on the body affect mood,emotion etc. For example,loud fast rhythm being 
>exciting ,or creating the feeling of excitement seems neither  personal 
>or 
>cultural.Of course some individuals and societies may value such 
>excitement,some disdain it,some forbid it and others institutionalise 
>it.I 
>other words they assign values/aesthetics to the physical responses in a 
>culturally determined way,at least partially.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Don’t miss your chance to WIN 10 hours of private jet travel from 
>Microsoft® Office Live 
>http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/mcrssaub0540002499mrt/direct/01/
>

_________________________________________________________________
http://homepage.msn.com/zune?icid=hmetagline