Enjoying ‘unaesthetic’ Art

When studying art history, it becomes quite apparent that, starting around the 19th century art was no longer required to be beautiful. Up until that point, there was a strongly held belief that art had to be ‘aesthetic’ in the sense that it was pleasing to look at. Most people believed that the main function of art was simply to be beautiful. However, when artists started producing what was considered ‘unaesthetic’ artworks, while originally dismissed by the general public at the time due to their lack of appeal at face value, the works often had much deeper meanings and usually coincided with significant historical events. In the art world today, these first ‘unaesthetic’ works are seen as some of the most crucial to the study because of their role in the development of deeper meanings that can be achieved within art. These artworks are presently very much enjoyed by many despite their objective ‘ugliness.’ But this raises the question: if a sense of ‘aesthetics’ plays such an important role in our enjoyment, how is it possible for us to enjoy works of art that are ‘unaesthetic’?

Miranda Mellen is an Anthropology, History, and Classical Civilizations major in her Senior year. While she's not in the Philosophy program, she has taken many philosophy classes and has a great interest in philosophical topics and concepts, specifically within the philosophy of art.