Though I admittedly found it hard to grasp or even agree with every idea presented within each angle Culler gives I found that Literature as Aesthetic stood out and was the most interesting to me. I thought it was very interesting how Culler brings up the debate between the objectivity of beauty in works of art in general vs. the subjectivity of them. I thought it was cool how this sort of looped back to his assertion that within literature there seem to be “rules” that define what is literature or not and through these rules it sort of creates an “objectivity” that can become universal. Conversely if left to opinion (subjectivity)  rather than a set of defining regulations, we are back to not being able to clearly define what is art or literature as easily.

I also really liked how Culler brings up of “aesthetic” bridges the gap between the material and spiritual world of ideas.  By Limiting a work to one means of communication ie. visual art or literary text it forces our brains to work on filling the blanks if you will. This filling of the blanks to me is when the spiritual world of ideas starts to come into play. Our own subjective thoughts and experiences combine with the work and form a new personalized meaning to it.

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.