The objective view of Martin Gardiner on Art
The objective view of Martin Gardiner on Art and aesthetics argue that the apparent properties of the painting, including its features, are in the eyes of the beholder. The objective Gardner indicates that individuals have different perspectives on art items and the beauty of the objects. As such, he suggests that productivity in all artwork, good or bad, transcends from both personal preferences, social norms, and standards (Course material). It is considerably hard to establish the beauty aspects of a painting from one viewpoint as people’s perceptions vary considerably. The observation, analysis, and perspectives upon which to examine an artwork vary from a person to another.
In the analysis of the artwork and beauty of the object, I concur with Gardiner’s view of beauty and the perceiver. It is apparent that a piece of Art can draw different impressions from different observers, thus leading to varying perspectives upon a similar piece of Art. The concept can be understood by considering the idea of the aesthetics of Art. This is a scientific discipline which deals with the value of Art, preference, beauty, principles, and concepts of the magnificence of artwork (Course material). Aesthetic is described as the review of contextual and sensory-emotional ideals in its more analytical epistemic point of view—decisions of feeling and taste. Esthetics explores our adaptive domain reaction to an instrument or concept. Aesthetic value decisions are based on our ability to differentiate at a perceptual stage. Nevertheless, it is worth noting that Artistic choices typically go beyond sensory attachment (Course material).
Other philosophers like Aristotle and Plato also provided valid arguments that can aid the understanding of the objective view of the Art. Aristotle claimed that the need to communicate their ideas do not only inspire artists, but they also have technical skills that enable them to design their works in an artistic manner that can hardly be understood by ordinary people. As such, Aristotle felt that it was ideal to present creative work objectively. On the other hand, Plato viewed Art as just an emulation of the “conceptual ideal society,” thus argued that in everything “three times detached from reality,” one should not discover any facts (ref). Plato argued that Artworks are mainly creative pieces that highlight the artist’s unique way of presenting his/her ideas. Accordingly, he believed that there is a clear distinction between an aesthetically pleasing painting that focuses exclusively on decoration and forms and a “true” piece of art that tries to “establish supreme judgement.” In other words, Plato had seen the tremendous power of art to manipulate the community as some dual-edged sword, which could either commit them to become virtuous, excellent citizens or destructive people (Course material).