What is beauty? Due to different understandings, the definition is uncertain. How to define beauty and whether beauty is subjective or objective has been debated for thousands of years.
Subjectivism holds that beauty is a personal subjective feeling and is related to the aesthetic subject. Different people have different aesthetic standards, that is, "I think this painting is beautiful"; Objectively speaking, beauty is an objective presentation, which is determined by the aesthetic object itself and can be expressed as "this painting is beautiful", in which beauty is a predicate and beauty is an attribute of things. Of course, there is also the insistence on compromise theory, which not only recognizes the subjectivity of individuals and the diversity of values, but also believes that people's aesthetic value judgment is universal. That is, the subjectivity of beauty in theory (relativism) and the objectivity of experience (the standard of beauty and ugliness in objective value) are a realistic compromise, so I won't say much here. The following mainly talks about the subjectivity, objectivity and discourse power of beauty.
From a certain point of view, the dispute between subjectivity and objectivity about beauty is actually a question about the right to speak. It is considered that beauty is subjective, that is, it recognizes the diversity of beauty and the non-uniqueness of aesthetic judgment. Adhering to beauty is objective, mostly standing on a certain position and denying other value judgments from one's own point of view, which is a kind of discourse hegemony. It believes that beauty has a standard, so who set this standard? Obviously, whoever sets this standard will have the power to judge beauty. Obviously, the aesthetic discourse power is usually controlled and monopolized by the so-called elite.
As far as actual history is concerned, the same is true. The arguments about beauty and the functional theory of art in ancient and modern China and abroad are generally confirmed in this respect. The relationship between subjectivity and objectivity of beauty and discourse power is embodied in the standard of beauty. It can be seen that the so-called artistic beauty is only the wishful judgment of elites, but because of their social status and various resource advantages, their standards often become the social standards and models of orthodox aesthetics. People who recognize natural beauty and aesthetics are basically from the perspective of the public. And in my opinion, the word "aesthetic" itself is an elite judgment concept. "Art" is also a unique resource for the elite. In the debate of historical aesthetics, different views on subjectivity and objectivity can be divided into elite position and mass position. People who insist on objectivism regard literature, art and aesthetics as tools and bear multiple educational significance such as social enlightenment and moral norms. The ruling class sets a standard for the public to accept and abide by, so as to facilitate management. Adhering to subjectivism can basically be considered as having no utilitarian purpose. From the standpoint of human beings, they acknowledge the independence of human beings as individuals and the diversity of the value of beauty. Only in this way can we really look at aesthetics from an objective and pure standpoint rather than a class standpoint, and we can really enjoy all kinds of real beauty, rather than the so-called beauty defined in concepts and definitions.
Starting from the west, Plato, a great philosopher in ancient Greece, is the earliest and most typical holder of the theory of social function of literature and art. He believes that "literature and art must be useful to human society and must serve politics, and the quality of literature and art must first be measured by political standards". [2] His philosophy and aesthetic thoughts are based on the basic political stance of maintaining aristocratic rule in the era of the rise of democratic forces in Athens. In his view, the world is divided into rational world, realistic world and artistic world, and rationality is the highest level. "Only the person with the highest cultural accomplishment in the aristocratic class (the person who loves wisdom)" is blessed to approach this unattainable "logical formula". Only according to this logical formula can we ensure the absolute control of reason and the absolute obedience of will and lust in people. From the standpoint of its ruling class, "Plato despises the perceptual world under the rational world and despises the instinct, emotion and desire related to the body." Despise the working people other than philosophers and' defenders', and despise practical activities outside the observation of philosophers and skills related to practical activities. " [3]
"Plato was the first in the west to clearly customize the evaluation criteria of the effect of political education in literature and art, which had a certain influence on Rousseau and Tolstoy's artistic view. Many bourgeois literary theorists in modern times often attack Plato's view of political first. In fact, all ruling classes use this standard, but they don't always make it clear. " [2] Yes, Plato simply insisted on the "theory of the function of literature and art", and his meaning about the standardization of beauty and the control of people was obvious and straightforward. In fact, many people who insist that beauty is an objective existence practice "discourse hegemony" like Plato and set the standard of beauty with their own elite position! Almost all the elites of the past dynasties defined their own aesthetic definitions, then criticized and denied other popular aesthetics and cultures, and even "spoke for" other groups, because they held the right to speak and were not allowed to publicize other words and different voices. For the ruling class for a long time, it is more important to formulate their own aesthetic norms and replace the public standards with orthodox ideas and aesthetic concepts, so as to control the public's thoughts and behaviors.
Horace, who was born in the golden age of Roman literature, acknowledged that "poetry has two functions of enlightenment and entertainment", but he still emphasized the combination of beauty and literature and art. Horace believed that "propriety" or "propriety" was an essential quality of poetry. The concept of "harmony" is a red line running through the art of poetry. "'combination' involves the issue of literary and artistic standards. What is a' combination'? Who made this formula? Is it immutable? ..... Horace's concept of "harmony" is the embodiment of slave owners' class consciousness in the final analysis, and harmony is actually mainly the "harmony" of educated slave owners. At that time, with the development of culture, the lower classes began to participate in literary and artistic activities, and their tastes and demands (their "style") began to have an impact; In Horace's view, this will inevitably undermine the criterion of "combination". " [4] He repeatedly lamented, "Imagine that some uneducated country people come out for the holidays and mix with the nobles in the city. What literary interest can you expect from them? " [4] His ideal of "harmony" is inseparable from the life ideal of Roman aristocrats.
The same is true in China. As an orthodox culture, Confucian culture has an objective aesthetic view. Orthodox literature and art have always expounded culture and aesthetics from the standpoint of nobles and rulers. Influenced by traditional ideas, China's mainstream literature and aesthetics are endowed with a historical mission, destined to be a vassal of politics and a projection of society. It has always been "the text carries the Tao", "the theme comes first" and "ethical principles" ... "Three Hundred Poems", in a word, it says: thinking innocently. "In the process of repeated deduction and description, literature and art are constantly bound, which makes it impossible for literature to truly face the real world and real human nature and judge life as' worthless and utilitarian'.
What Confucianism wants is to establish a stable order. There is a cloud in The Analects of Confucius: "Go, take advantage of Yin, offer encouragement from Zhou, enjoy Shao and Wu, let go, and make people far away." Zheng Sheng is a prostitute, and she is dangerous. "The word Shao is both beautiful and good. It is said that "Wu" is beautiful, but not perfect. "Evil purple captures Zhu Ye, evil Zheng Sheng confuses elegant music, and evil covers the country" are all good standards about beauty among the so-called Zhou Li aristocrats.
For thousands of years, the elite has been standing at the height of the creators of literature and aesthetics, trying to control the aesthetic taste of the public with their own value judgments, and arrogantly shouldering the "heavy responsibility" of guiding and educating the people.
But do elites really monopolize the aesthetics of literature and art as they wish? The answer is no, because the power of the people is enormous, the power of folk literature and art is profound, the charm of folklore and folk art is endless, and the vitality of beauty is tenacious and tenacious, which cannot be ignored and suppressed. Popular literature and art, folk aesthetics, customs and culture, and beauty stubbornly preserve their own life forms and continue from generation to generation.
Kant, the founder of western classical aesthetics, also insists that beauty is subjective. He believes that judging whether an object is beautiful or not lies not in the characteristics of the object itself, but in what kind of mentality we use, that is, the aesthetic charm lies in your heart, which is subjective rather than objective. From a qualitative point of view, appreciation and judgment are a kind of fun without interest; From the quantitative point of view, appreciation and judgment are pleasant and independent of concepts. That is, everything that is universally liked without concept is beautiful. Obviously, it recognizes that the universality of aesthetics is subjective universality, and also recognizes individual judgment and public aesthetic judgment.
China's Taoist thought also thinks that all order starts from "I" and each "I" is different, so there is no absolute order and no standard aesthetic model.
In modern times, popular culture has broken the dominant position of elite culture in ruling the world for a long time and become the mainstream and leading of the times. Faced with this trend, the elites are naturally unwilling, posing as cultural savers and criticizing various popular cultural phenomena that appear today. However, it turns out that all struggles are in vain.
In fact, beauty is inherently uncertain, and aesthetic judgment itself is pluralistic. All classes and groups have their own value judgments, and elites don't have to make aesthetic judgments for the public. In fact, both history and reality have proved that popular culture is irreplaceable and rich.
There is no uniform definition of beauty, and there is no definite standard for beauty. All classes and groups have their own aesthetic judgments. It's better not to interfere in others, accommodate each other and develop together.
References:
[1] Note: The specific meanings of the words "elite" and "mass" here are not exactly the same as those used in the usual research and discussion in modern society. The "elite" and "mass" here refer to the so-called upper-class intellectuals and the so-called lower-class people respectively, which are two relative concepts, not specifically referring to the modern social stratum, but also including the upper and lower classes in ancient times. The "popular culture" here is a broader concept, not specifically referring to the "popular culture" manipulated by modern society, but a culture that originated from the masses, was admired by the masses, loved by the masses and existed since ancient times relative to the people's own culture of the upper class. It can be said that folk culture and popular culture are also included.
[2] Zhu Guangqian. History of western aesthetics. [M] Beijing: Commercial Press, June 2006.1.16.
[3] Zhu Guangqian. History of western aesthetics. [M] Beijing: Commercial Press, June 2006.1.19.
[4] Zhu Guangqian. History of western aesthetics. [M] Beijing: Commercial Press, June 2006.144.