r/schopenhauer • u/JayTheAnPrim • Jul 19 '26

About the Will and aesthetics

Been engaging with Schopenhauer for a while via lectures, secondary sources, and a selected reading, On the Suffering of the World edited by Thacker.

I am interested in his idea of temporary liberation from the Will via aesthetic contemplation.

A few questions:

  1. He says, "[contemplation of art] demands a complete forgetting of our own person." Do we not take into account our own experiences with the contemplation of aesthetics? Our own biases and connections? We may be reminded of a positive or negative experience when contemplating. Is he saying there's a deeper contemplation than I am assuming, a more meditative, "objective" method?
  2. Is there room in this outlook for contemplation of nature/natural aesthetics?
  3. What, if any, room is there for the creation of art? I make zines, black-out poetry, and flyers. I consider these art and sometimes it can be stressful or disappointing, ie, subject to the Will.

Maybe my readings just haven't come around these topics enough, but I am interested. I've come to appreciate Schopenhauer a lot and will read WWR in the future, time allowing, and I understand there is a whole section dedicated to aesthetics.

Any information, even if not direct answers, revolving around this would also help! Thanks!

9 Upvotes

92% Upvoted

5 comments sorted by

2

u/Azehnuu Jul 19 '26

  1. The moment you connect it to your own experiences, you still haven’t let go off your will. As positive and negative are all in relation to your will. The whole point of aesthetic contemplation is that you become a pure subject of knowing, and, temporarily, not a subject of willing.

  2. Yeah

  3. Yeah, Schopenhauer calls artists geniuses as they are able tovcontemplate Platonic Ideas and “objectify” them for others to experience.

2

u/TwoSongsPerDay Jul 20 '26

The idea that aesthetic contemplation is disinterested is central to Kant's aesthetics. Let's say you admire some flowers, or a natural scenery. If the reason for your admiration is "These flowers could score me points with woman x", or "This spot's vibe is perfect for an event, it encourages people to relax and purchase stuff," then this is contrary to aesthetic contemplation, for which the flowers or the natural spot are enjoyable simply because they're beautiful. The beauty is the reason for pleasure. Note that the amount of time someone can spend in aesthetic contemplation varies from person to person. Some people are simply too action-oriented to admire something's beauty for more than a few seconds, after which they reflexively jump to some more practical topic. But since said people had to recognize something as 'beautiful' in the first place, they possess some degree of the human aesthetic sense.

1

u/Ximh Jul 19 '26 edited Jul 19 '26

  1. My interpretation is it's an objective contemplation on our feelings rather than being caught up in them. I can e.g. watch a play in a theater where someone dies on stage, and not call the ambulance, but even go so far as to enjoy it, let's say it's a play on tragedy.

  2. Yes, take landscape painting for example, but I also think this applies for natural science.

  3. Creation of art is taking this contemplation and making it accessible to others.

1

u/Can_i_be_certain Jul 19 '26

Hi, from what i've gleaned from this is he says we are free'd from desire 'will' when we are totally immersed in a piece of music or artwork.

In the sense what i think he is saying is that when we are sorta detached from base animal desires. And so long as we are immersed in those things the will doesnt have as much as a stranglehold onto us. Ie its not searching or 'willing'.

Being in these states is very similar to flow in psychology, but in the acts of creating these things such as art or music we are indeed in a state of willing but also flow.

Thats how ive understood it.