Johann Gottfried Herder held an aesthetic view that was totally
different and reconcillably opposed to the view of Immanuel Kant
and Alexander Gottlieb Baumgarten. Herder's views were those encountered
in modern cultural anthropology.
"...the imponderables of empirical life
[are] among the essential engines of artistic creation. Accordingly, he
[Herder] rejects universalistic constructs of the self as well as binding
paradigms of the beautiful. Because both cases have to do only with
arbitrarily created ideals, it is, as a countermove to art, incumbent upon
the aesthetic and 'interessegeleiteten' (interest-directed) self to
discover new areas of experience. Aesthetic individuality is measured
accordingly for Herder, according to willingness not to appeal to specific
points of view and exclusive moral concepts." 1
"... according to Herder, '[was] wir wissen, wissen wir nur aus Analogie';
(what we know, we know only through analogy), and because this also holds
true in the final analysis for scholarly principles and anthropological
universals, these truths cannot be proved. Truths then become matters of
faith. Formulaic proclamations about nature can be successively traced back
to humans, who think and perceive in terms of analogies, who learn to think,
as it were, under certain climatic and geographic conditions. Due to this
radical questioning of discursive thinking, Herder is not able to accept the
supposition that the human being discovers, without conceptions, a
transcendental and non-temporal world order ..." 2
"The explosive power of such ideas cannot be measured by the reservations
that Herder has against the self-image of Enlightenment rationalists. In
their circle any conclusion that was responsible, due to its crude faith
in science, for the age of light gradually losing its perspective, was
viewed as scandalous. Applied to Herder's reading of the works of Baumgarten
it becomes clear why he had to reject the putative revaluation of the senses
within the context of scientific theories of the beautiful: because enlightened
philosophers such as Baumgarten merely exploit the senses as tools of reason,
they punish the human being to a certain extent with abiding blindness. Instead
of making the senses and with them the undisciplined presence of everyday life
a starting point for their aesthetic ideas, they begin with the notion of a
heretofore Christian transfigured hereafter, which is now associated with
eternal truths ..." 3
The painting above by Thomas Eakins was received with shock and disgust!
It was rejected as "art": Art is to be beautiful. Blood in a surgery theatre
is not art! It cannot be displayed in a living room. This is precisely what
Herder has in mind! Art is NOT to be judged by preconceived views of "beauty"
nor by preconceived standards of morality. Why must we reject paintings
by Otto Dix of the horrible battlefields of World War 1 as non-art? Why must
we reject the art of horror or disgust in "Los Desastres de la Guerra" by Goya?
Why must we close our eyes to the art in Dante's "Inferno" by Doré? Why
must what the artist experiences be censored? Must beauty or art be limited to
the abilities and imagination of those without a creative mind? Hitler rejected
art he considered "degenerate" (a parallel judgement here to censoring, but now
using "disgust" as the aesthetic filter). Herder asks: Is this what we are to
mean by the term "Enlightenment"?
1
"A Companion to the Works of Johann Gottfried Herder", Editors: Hans Adler, Wulf Koepke; p. 146
2
ibid., p. 147 The transcendental, non-temporal world is a world never experienced: consistent with prejudices.
3
ibid., pp. 147, 148