cogito ergo fio
Aug 8, 2017 · 1 min read

“ Plus for me “experience” brings time onto the table. When you experience something you have to be in the present and since everyone is under the time, the experience itself becomes bound to time. But art should in my opinion not be bound to time.”

This is a key point in aesthetic theory. In the distinction between aesthetical experience and historical experience lies the concept of the “timelessness of the aesthetic horizon”, by such, insofar as it is impossible to remove oneself of the historical horizon that encompasses historical experiences (i.e philological efforts must take into account both the present historical limitations and the evaluated subject) works of art either inhabit a different plane, as if crystallized, or contain in themselves the capability to compress historical limitations would occur if the subject was of another nature (other than the aesthetic).

“Experiences” should, then, be thought as having different natures, taking into account objects and subjects and what goes on between them that constitutes the experience.

Other than that i don’t dispute the utility “art status” has, but that should not be the focus of an art theory essay.

    cogito ergo fio

    Written by

    As Palavra É Suave Mas O Argumento É Forte