ESTETIKA DWILOGI NOVEL SAMAN DAN LARUNG KARYA AYU UTAMI

ABSTRACT Abstract : Aesthetics as theory have expanded along with the developing it, especially in literature and generally in cultural. Modernist aesthetics have rounded into the postmodernist aesthetics. Besides that, aesthetics which is emphasizing at feminism view also expand, that is usually called the feminist aesthetics. These postmodernist aesthetics feminist aesthetics are made as the basis for theory to explain the social phenomena, cultural, and political that can be found on dwilogi Saman and Larung novels by Ayu Utami

The Fear of Aesthetics in Art and Literary Theory

Is aesthetics, as has recently been claimed, now able to meet the accusations often levelled against it? This essay examines counters to three of the most common: that aesthetics is based around overly narrow conceptions of "art" and "the aesthetic"; that aesthetics is politically disengaged; and that aesthetics fails to engage with actual art objects and their histories

Garden as Symbol: Nature/City

My approach .to environmental aesthetics here begins with reflections on previous encounters with the subject, focusing initially on aesthetics of the city. Then follows a brief look at current theories of environmental aesthetics as they relate to nature aesthetics. The final section will consider garden as a symbolic link of nature/city. Nelson Goodman \u27s theory of exemplification will serve as an account of garden as a symbol linking nature and city

The primitivism debate and modern art

Supposedly ‘primitive’ works of art in their various forms always had a great appeal in Western culture. Since the eighteenth century (and also before) there has been a consistent tendency in European Art and Literature to attribute superior virtue to primitive people. In this paper I will introduce first the notion of primitivism and the theoretical aspects presented by two American scholars, Arthur O. Lovejoy and George Boas who became the pioneers of the history and theorisation of primitivism when they published their seminal work on Classical literature and philosophy, Primitivism and Related Ideas in Antiquity, (1935). I will also discuss the central question why modern artists turned to primitive art for inspiration. And I will be referring to the seminal work published by Robert Goldwater in 1938, Primitivism in Modern Art. Although Goldwater seemed to be more concerned with the thematic approach, he stressed a common characteristic of primitivism in modern art, namely the search for ‘simplicity’. The controversial exhibition, “Primitivism” in 20th Century Art: Affinity of the Tribal and the Modern held at the Museum of Modern Art in New York in 1984 helps us to understand better the difference between works created by the ‘primitives’ and the works made by modern artists within a different context. The ‘Primitive’ is not only found in modern art but also traced in other categories like the art of children, peasants, and the insane and even women.peer-reviewe

Why Does Feminism Matter To Aesthetics?

Peter Lamarque recently reported on current trends in aesthetics in the Postgraduate Journal of Aesthetics. Noticeably absent from his list, however, is the emergence and acceptance of feminist approaches in aesthetics, especially among analytic philosophers. Yet feminism is an important movement, one that should have been included among those he discusses. Indeed, my goal is to convince you that feminism should have made it onto Lamarque’s list. Rather than criticize him, however, I want to use his oversight to ask why feminist philosophers working in analytic aesthetics have trouble getting the recognition they deserve. My suggestion will be that the specificity of feminist critiques in aesthetics is often what makes it difficult for philosophers to appreciate their significance. I will also argue that it is precisely because of this specificity that feminism is a uniquely important movement in contemporary aesthetics

Re-Discovering Aesthetics

The beginning of the 21st century has seen the renewed use of aesthetics as a critical and interpretive method within various discursive spheres. Particularly, and unsurprisingly, this move has been most pronounced in the discursive systems of philosophy and the artworld. It is to this more specific re-discovery that the authors in this journal address their arguments

Ishiguro's Inhuman Aesthetics

The question of what it means to be human pervades Kazuo Ishiguro's novel Never Let Me Go, which gradually reveals a counterfactual twentieth-century England where clone colonies provide ready supplies of organs for donation. In the tradition of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World (1932) and George Orwell's 1984 (1949), the novel envisions a dystopian civil society where clones struggle to comprehend the significance of their own circumscribed personhood. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this interrogation of what it means to be human emerges through a critique of Romantic-inspired assumptions about aesthetics and empathy. While the novel attracts attention for its theme of genetic engineering, its deepest anxieties arguably concern the ethics of artistic production and consumption in an age of multiculturalism and globalization. Through its veneer of science fiction, Never Let Me Go offers an allegory both for national concerns about the state of England and for transnational fears about rising global inequality. In its portrait of the systematic exploitation of the clones and its implicit exploration of vulnerable actors in our modern economic order, the novel indicts humanist conceptions of art as a form of extraction that resembles forced organ donation. If Romantic-inspired views of empathy rely on the claim that art reveals the human soul, Ishiguro's novel implies that the concept of the soul invokes a fundamentally exploitative discourse of use value. In this respect, Never Let Me Go shares in a pervasive late-twentieth-century cultural skepticism about the viability of empathetic art. [End Page 785] Yet Ishiguro's critique does not—as might be expected—abandon the ethical potential of works of art. Instead, it makes a case for an ethics offering a very different approach to art and empathy that relies on the recognition of the inhuman. As an alternative to humanist modes of representation, Ishiguro's inhuman style suggests that only by recognizing what in ourselves is mechanical, manufactured, and replicated—in a traditional sense, not fully human—will we escape the barbarities committed in the name of preserving purely human life. Never Let Me Go implies that if there is to be any empathetic connection with Ishiguro's protagonists, it will not occur through the consoling liberal realization that clones are humans, just like us. It will evolve through the darker realization that art, along with the empathy it provokes, needs to escape the traditional concept of the human. The novel thus calls for what seems like a contradiction in terms: an empathetic inhuman aesthetics that embraces the mechanical, commodified, and replicated elements of personhood. While inhuman is often used as a synonym for cruel or unethical, Ishiguro's novel suggests exactly the reverse. As its aesthetics of replication allows us to sympathize with others without recourse to such constraining ideals, Never Let Me Go reinvents empathy for a posthumanist age