Nature is not natural and can never be naturalized — Graham Harman

Sunday, August 13, 2017

Here's a Tiny Bit of My Penguin Book to Give You the Level

“Kant described beauty as a feeling of ungraspability: this is why the beauty experience is beyond concept. You don’t eat a painting of an apple; you don’t find it morally good; instead, it tells you something strange about apples in them- selves. Beauty doesn’t have to be in accord with prefabricated concepts of ‘pretty’. It’s strange, this feeling. It’s like the feel- ing of having a thought, without actually having one. In food marketing there is a category that developed in the last two decades or so called mouthfeel. It’s a rather disgusting term for the texture of food, how it interacts with your teeth and your palate and your tongue. In a way, Kantian beauty is thinkfeel. It’s the sensation of having an idea…”

1 comment:

Igor Livramento said...

I wanna read that, dude! It provides me some insight.
As I've commented on another post, I will open up a bit.
I am currently working on Theses on the Ugly , a series of fragments (not aphorisms, not paragraphs, no nothing – fragments, floating pieces of languageland).
There I insist on how Beauty has overriden the other two aspects of the medieval truth: "quodlibet ens est unum, verum, bonum seu perfectum", that is, to be "good" and "truthful" have been forgotten for the sake of "beauty".
I know this borders on french-influenced "sociological philosophy", but it matters quite a lot to grasp such conception.
Hence the question: what are the uses of beauty today?
I claim they are aligned with global capitalism and moral depravity, owing much to my marxist roots.
And as an exit, I propose the ugly .
But how does one define it?
Contact me privately ( or via my Facebook account) and we can dive deep into more details!

As usual, awesome entry. Keep up the great work!
Cheers from Brasil.