Morals and ethics are both codes of conduct relating to right and wrong. Whilst ethics are dependent on an exterior source of rules, regulations and sometimes law, such as the code of conduct in a public space or a work place, morals can be defined as an individual’s own principles of right and wrong and can go against ethical rules. Morals, therefore, truly define an individual’s take on what is right and wrong, despite what ethical principles they may follow. An individual’s moral outlook may change as they become more aware of the world around them and learn more about issues which require moral attention. As it is produced by and for individuals with their own morals, art’s connection to both the Art World and reality, ties it up in all sorts of moral issues. The question of whether art can effect our moral outlook is asking whether an individual’s perception of right and wrong can be altered by experiencing a work of art. This essay will explore the moral effect of art on audiences, and question where the responsibility for this …show more content…
The clarificationist believes that the engagement of morals is not a consequence of the art but an inherent part of engaging with the work in the first place. If an individual is engaging their pre-existing ‘good morals’ by engaging with a ‘morally good’ book, Caroll argues there is possibility and potential for this engagement to result in positive behavioural change. In simple terms, for the clarificationist, engaging with art IS engaging the morals, and that engagement might result in altering behaviour due to a ‘moral
Imagine a working class society where the liberal-arts became extinct. The workforce would be occupied with employees that could not read, write, or communicate properly. Although this is only a theory, with a declining rate and the on-going neglect of the liberal-arts education this prediction is not far from reality. When thinking of the essence and significance of liberal arts many authors write to explain the importance in articles, two of these distinguished figures are Sanford J. Ungar and Charles Murray. In Ungar’s article, “The New Liberal Arts,” he advocates for the liberal-arts and all that it has to offer to scholars.
By placing a strong value on the moment of encounter or interaction with art, the author argues that art is not merely a static object but rather, an interaction between the viewer and the art. This language deepens the reader's understanding of Asher as a character and his deep connection to art but also the nature of art itself as a transformative experience rather than a stationary one. 17 Ladover Ideological quote “ One’s duty in life is to keep one’s miseries
All books that young adults read have power. Their power results in their ability to sway and to change the reader in so many ways, not the least of these is morally. These books can create a moral sense in the young by demonstrating what is morally right and what is morally wrong. They can raise and resolve ethical issues. The reader may not agree with each resolution, but is certainly forced to think about issues he or she may never have thought about before (Smith 63).
THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN SWEPT AWAY BY THE WAVE OF TECHNOLOGY AND DON’T KNOW HOW TO GET OUT. “He kept getting trapped behind iPhone zombies, people half his age who wandered in a dream with their eyes fixed on their screens…. A young woman stopped abruptly at the top of the stairs and he almost crashed into her, glared as he brushed past-she didn’t notice, enraptured by her screen” (160-161). 2. FINDING THE BEAUTY IN A PLACE, AND ENJOYING WHAT’S AMAZING ABOUT IT.
Works of art can tell stories and speak to the audience. Analyzing small details leads viewers to dig deeper past the meaning and understand what messages the artist is trying to convey. William Hogarth’s The Harlot’s Progress (1732) is considered to be narrative art because it tells the story about the progression of a young lady who comes to the city from the country and lands up in the ring of prostitution. This is the first painting in the series of three painting that shows the young girl’s downfall and destruction.
Irvin’s viewpoint of Clive Bell’s statement is of interest. Per Irvin, “…a work with aesthetic value automatically has positive moral interest” (1.11). In response to Bell, a thought-provoking question is immediately raised. How can a piece of work with aesthetic value automatically have positive moral value? Do people not consider, for example, the true meaning or language behind the piece of work?
On the preface of the book, Wilde talks about the role of art in society. “There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written. That is all” (Wilde). In this quote present in the preface, Wilde gave his opinion and he then explained why he believed that morality should not be involved with art.
Being that art is a very important aspect of society, and
I] Introduction Lewis Hyde’s “The Gift”, subtitled “Creativity and the Artist in the modern world” is a deliberation – thesis, if you will - on the nature of the creative process; likening it to the principles of a gift economy and thereby highlighting the uneasy existence of creative labour and art in a modern world ruled by the ethos of capitalism. Published in 1983, Hyde’s work is heavily influenced by that of the acclaimed sociologist Marcell Mauss according to whom gift economies are marked by circulation and connectivity: goods have value only insofar as they are treated as gifts, and gifts can remain gifts only if they are continually given away. This results in a kind of engine of community cohesion, in which objects create social,
William Golding uses the theme that humans are naturally bad at heart, in the book Lord of the Flies to highlight that without the order and respect we choose to live our daily lives with our human nature will ultimately take us into chaos and savagery. Morals are what we choose to live by, this is what keeps us accountable. Morals do not appear overnight. Overtime they are ingrained throughout our childhood. Giving us a sense of right and wrong.
But, taking into account all of Wilde’s arguments to defend the book, one must understand that this book isn’t looking to have a moral impact, but instead to free art from morality and social punishment, making society understand what aestheticism really is. Therefore, this book is neither moral nor
In his documentary film “why beauty matters” English philosopher Roger Scruton introduces the idea of beauty is disappearing from our world. The philosopher implies, that Art has become ugly, as well as our physical surroundings, manners, language, and music. Nowadays, the main aim of art is to disturb and break moral taboos. It has now lost its initial duty and is used to show solely the ugliness of our world, instead of taking what is most painful in the human condition and redeeming it in the work of beauty. What according to Scruton is the main purpose of art.
Most art requires an audience, a fantastic performance but with no audience, does not bring about the message of the performance. The role of an audience is very prominent in the arts scene, be it being a spectator or a participant. However, audiences’ role in arts has significantly changed over the years. Audiences does not want to appreciate art just by viewing, they want to be involve in the process of art creation. Based on an article written by Ben Walmsley, Walmsley (2013) mentions that the trend now is that audience wants to “engage with the arts in a more participatory way”, so as to achieve a more immersive and fulfilling experience (p.1).
This research was carried out not to only show awareness toward the society but also why people should take art seriously. Often times, we can see lots of people debating whether art is important or not. This happened because the lack of exposure and knowledge that has been taught to them. Art can help to shape the society and affect the society to broaden their view of perspective in life by referring on the artworks because each work of art can give different meanings to life.
By this he means that ‘art’ does not want to be accessible only to a few “highly cultivated men” but instead also to ordinary people, like the people in the audience. By using words such as “cheerful freedom”, “open-heartedness” and “reality” in contrast with “sickens”, “selfishness” and “luxury” he creates the sense that the bad things happen because of the limitation of art and that the better things will come if only people learn to enjoy art. He then says that if art has a limit he “does not wish her to live” which is a strong exaggerated statement and was made to convince the audience of his argument. Morris relates “an honest artist” not sharing his work with “a rich man” who eats food in front of starving soldiers, this could also be interpreted as an exaggeration and might have been so by part of the audience, however the use of imagery would have added to his conviction. He ends his lecture on a powerful note, “I do not want art for a few, any more than education for a few, or freedom for a few”, by using the repetition and relating art to education and freedom he heightens the importance of art in the eyes of the audience as a final technique to persuade