Art, Terrorism and The Negative Sublime

Art,TerrorismandtheNegativeSublime
ArnoldBerleant
Abstract
Therangeoftheaesthetichasexpandedtocovernotonlyawiderrangeofobjectsandsituationsof
dailylifebutalsotoencompassthenegative.Thisincludesterrorism,whoseaestheticimpactis
centraltoitsuseasapoliticaltactic.Thecomplexofpositiveandnegativeaestheticvaluesin
terrorismareexplored,introducingtheconceptofthesublimeasanegativecategorytoilluminate
theanalysisandthedistinctiveaestheticofterrorism.
KeyWords
Burke,Happenings,Kant,negativeaestheticvalues,negativesublime,terror,terrorism,terrorist
organizations
Induetime,thetheoryofaestheticswillhavetoaccountnotonlyforthedelightinKantianbeauty
andthesublime,butforthephenomenalikeaestheticviolenceandtheaestheticizationof
violence,ofaestheticabuseandintrusion,thebluntingofsensibility,itsperversion,andits
poisoning.[1]
1. TerrorismandAesthetics
Ithasbecomeincreasinglyclearthatthearts,andtheaesthetic,moregenerally,occupynohallowed
groundbutliveontheeverydayearthofourlives.Recognitionisgrowingthattheaestheticisa
pervasivedimensionoftheobjectsandactivitiesofdailylife.[2]Perceptualexperiencesthatpossess
thecharacteristicsofaestheticappreciationaremarkedbyanintense,focusedsensibilityweenjoy
foritsintrinsicperceptualsatisfaction.Wetypicallyhavesuchexperienceswithworksofartandwith
nature,buttheyareequallypossibleinotheroccasionsandwithotherkindsofobjects.Such
experiencesengageusinanintenselysensoryfieldinwhichweparticipatewhollyandwithout
reservation,aswecustomarilydowithworksofart.Theobjectsandoccasions,however,maybe
ordinaryones,suchaseating,hanginglaundry,engaginginsocialrelations,oroperatingaperfectly
functioningautomobileorothermechanism.Therangeofsuchoccasionsislimitless,andthisadds
tothesignificanceoftheaestheticsoftheeveryday.
Suchanexpansionoftheaesthetichasimportantconsequences.Perhapsthemoststrikingisthe
needtoacknowledgethattherangeofaestheticexperienceincludesmorethantheappreciative
engagementwithartandnature.Butnotonlydoestheaestheticextendtotheuncustomarybutit
encompassesthefullrangeofhumannormativeexperience.Experiencesoftheaestheticincludenot
onlytheelevatedandnoblebutthereprehensible,degrading,anddestructive.Thisissonotasthe
resultofanarbitrarydecisiontoincludethembutfromactualexperienceandpractice.Theaesthetic
offersafullanddirectgraspofthehumanworld.Thatitmayincludeviolenceanddepravityisnotthe
faultofaestheticsbutofthatworld.
http://www.contempaesthetics.org/newvolume/pages/article.php?articleID=568
1/12
Asalientsymptomofthatworldisterrorism.Itswantonviolenceanduncontrolleddestructionare
appalling.Buteasymoraloutrageoffersnounderstanding,andonlybygraspingthemeaningsand
significanceofterrorismcanwehopetodealwithiteffectively.LetmebeginwiththeHappening,for
theHappeningcanprovideaforcefulilluminationoftheaestheticofterrorism.
NotthatHappeningstooknegativeform.Asyncretic,visualtheatricalartisticdevelopmentof
the1960s,Happeningswereadeliberateartisticinnovationintentontransgressingallthehard
boundariesthatprotectedtheartsandmadethemsafe.InHappeningsaudiencesbecamethe
performers,noclearlycircumscribedobjectcouldbeidentifiedastheworkofart,aestheticdistance
wasrelinquishedtotheactiveengagementoftheaudience,artisticgenreswerefusedinto
unrecognizablecombinationsand,mostsignificantly,theboundarybetweenartandlifedisappeared.
Happeningswereoftenplayful,evenfestiveoccasionsthatdancedoverthepietiesofconventional
artisticaxioms.
SomecommentatorsquicklyrecognizedthattheimportanceoftheHappeninglaybeyondits
iconoclasmandentertainmentvalue.OneofthemwasRegisDebray,ayoungFrenchradical
intellectual,who"regardedarevolutionasacoordinatedseriesofguerrillaHappenings.Someofhis
admirers,infact,tookpartinHappeningsastrainingforfutureHappeningswhentheywoulduse
gunsandgrenades."[3]Whatmanyhadconsideredabizarreexaggerationfollowingthedismissalof
traditionalartisticformsturnsouttohavebeenanuncannyprevisionoftheworldhalfacentury
later.Thenetofterrorisminwhichtheworldisnowenmeshedisallenclosing.Buthowcanterrorism
beconsideredinthesamesenseasart?Thequestionitselfseemsoutrageous.
Happeningsmadearadicalbreakfromtheaesthetictraditionbydenyingthatartoccupiesitsown
exclusiverealmseparatefromtheworldoutside.YetitwasnotonlyHappeningsthatrejectedthis
traditionmanyotherartisticdevelopmentsinthetwentiethcenturydeliberatelycrossedthat
boundary.Thepresumptivedifferencebetweentheworldofartandtheworldofdailylifeliesatthe
sourceofsuchperennialproblemsinaestheticsasthestatusoftruthandillusioninart,themoral
effectsofartworks,andthenatureofartisticrepresentation.Suchcontinuingissues,allofwhichcan
betracedbacktoPlato,findinartisticautonomythedomainofhumanfreedom,asKanthadclaimed.
[4]Yetatthesametimeitisanautonomythat,byphilosophicdecree,vitiatestheforceofthearts
andignorestheirpower.
ThetraditionofrestrictingandremovingartfromtheworldofdailylifedatesfromPlatossuspicion
thattheartscanhaveamorallydegeneratinginfluence.ExpressedmostfamouslyinTheRepublic,it
ledhimtoadvocatestrictcontrolsontheuseoftheartsineducationandtoproposecensorship.[5]
This,ofcourse,wasrelatedtoPlatosmistrustofsenseexperience,whichheconsideredthesource
ofillusionandfalsebelief.TheseviewswerereinforcedandenlargedbyKant,whoclaimedearlyin
themodernperiodthattheautonomyofjudgmentsoftasteisentirelyindependentoftheexistenceof
theobjectofoursatisfactionandisnotboundupwithpracticalinterest.[6]
Theeffectoftheseideasonthehistoryofphilosophyhasbeenprofound.Platosmistrustofthe
sensesandartisticindependenceandhisfailuretorecognizetheimaginativecontributionthatthe
artscanmaketoeducationandmoraldevelopmentjoinedwithKantsdenialoffullaesthetic
2/12
satisfactiontotheinterestsofdailylife.Togethertheyfunctionedeffectivelytomuzzlethepowerof
thearts.Yetoncewerecognizetheactiveinterplaythatoccursbetweenartobjectsandactivitiesand
theworldinwhichtheyexist,wefindvastnewopportunitiesforpowerandinfluence.
Theforceinherentinthisrelationhasnotbeenlostonthemodernstate.Forphilosophicalaesthetics
deliberatelytoignorethepoliticalpotentialanduseoftheartsistohandthatpowerovertoothers
whosevalues,standards,andbehaviorareoftenignorant,manipulative,andselfaggrandizing.The
traditionalseparationofaestheticsfromdailylifehasfreelyallowedthepoliticalappropriation,often
themisappropriation,ofthearts.Thatiswhygovernmentspracticenewsmanagementandother
formsofcensorship,whytheystageconferences,rallies,andotherpoliticalevents,whythey
promoteofficialart,andwhytheypersecuteartistswhodonotconformtotheirpurposesand
destroytheirworks.Artisdangerous,andKantgotitbackwardswhenheplacedmoralityandartin
separatedomains.
Intheinterpenetrationofartandthehumanworldarethegroundsforanewaestheticvisionandthe
needtoarticulateit.[7]WhenHappeningsfusedartwiththeeverydayworld,theydidsoasart.But
whataboutpresumablynonartobjectsthataredirectlyperceivedasart?Thereis,ofcourse,"found
art,"whereanobjectisextrapolatedfromtheeverydayworld,segregated,andframed:apieceof
driftwood,abouquetoffieldflowers,and,ofcourse,theperennialurinal.Artisclaimedwherenone
wasintended.Someinstancesoffoundartarebenign,someprovocative,othersdeliberately
inflammatory.Theysaynothingaboutthemotivesofthosewhodidthemakingandforwhomthe
ideaofartwasprobablyfarfrommind.Whatfoundartdoesdoiscenterourattentiononanobjector
eventinawaythatresemblestheintensefocuswegivetothingsdesignatedasartbyanartist,an
institution,ortheartworld.LikeHappenings,foundartplacesartsquarelyintheordinaryworld.Can
thisapplytoactsofterrorism?
Someofthemoststrikingclaimsofartforthingsoutsidetheartworldwereresponsestotheterrorist
attacksof9/11.TheavantgardecomposerKarlheinzStockhausencalledthem"thegreatestworkof
artever.thegreatestworkofartforthewholecosmos,""ajumpoutofsecurity,theeveryday."And
theBritishartistDamienHirstexcludedartfromallmoraljudgment,arguingthattheviolence,horror,
anddeathassociatedwithGroundZero(thenamegiventothesiteofthedemolishedNewYork
WorldTradeCenter)donotruleoutthepossibilitythatfilmfootageoftheattackcouldbe"visually
stunning"andresembleworksofart.[8]Indeed,perceivingthatfootageasartmaybetheultimate
actofframing.Whethertheseeventscanbeconsideredfoundartcanbedebatedbutthelabelwe
givethemisincidental.Ofmoreconcernhereistheclaimthattheyareartorlikeart.
Attributingartisticachievementtotheperpetratorsmayseemrevolting,butitwouldbearrogantand
myopictoblithelydismissstatementslikeHirstsandStockhausens.Forwemusttakecarenotto
confoundtheaestheticwithartortoconsidereitherofthesenecessarilypositive.Tocallthefilm
footageoftheattackvisuallystunningacknowledgestheiraestheticimpact.Manyartworkscouldbe
describedinsimilartermsbutyetreflectdifferentcontentandmoralmeaning.FrederickEdwin
ChurchsTheIcebergs(1861)isvisuallystunningsoareTurnersTheBurningoftheHousesof
LordsandCommons(1834)andMathiasGrnewaldsCrucifixion(1515).
3/12
Butsoalsoaremanynaturalevents:sunsets,thefullmooninthenightsky,theseainagreatstorm.
Butperceptualforcealone,whileaesthetic,doesnotmakeart.Itmaylieinthesubjectmatterofan
artworkbutaspartofthewholeitissomethingdifferent.ThereisasenseinwhichStockhausens
commentcanbetakenliterallybyregardingthe9/11terroristattacksastheater.Stockhausenhimself
composedmusicalworkswithdramaticvenuesandenormousscale,sohiscallingtheattacksthe
biggestworkofarttherehaseverbeenwasnotentirelyunpredictableoroutofcharacter.
Buthowcanwerespondtothesecomments?Isitpossibletodisentangletheaestheticfromthe
moralinsuchahighlychargedsituationordoesthemoralissueentirelyoverpowertheaesthetic
one?TherearenounequivocalanswersandperhapstheconsiderationofHappenings,
transgression,andviolencecanhelpusmaketheseassertionsunderstandable.Theymaysuggesta
wayofgraspingthemthatisnotimmediatelyobvious.Butfirst,however,isthematterofterrorism,
itself.
Simplytolistthedefinitionsofterrorismwouldtakepages.Whattheyhaveincommonistheuseof
violenceorthethreatofviolence.[9]Mostoftenaddedtothedefinitionisthatterrorismfocusesona
civilianpopulationwiththeintentionofcreatingwidespreadfear,andthatitismotivatedbypoliticalor
ideologicalobjectives.Terrorismalsocarriesanelementoftheunexpected.Anelementofchance
entersintoitschoice(ifwemaycallitthat)ofvictimsandsometimesinthedeterminationofspecific
timeandlocation,andthisaddsgreatlytothefearthatactsofterrorismevoke.
Itisinterestingtoconsiderthatthiscombinationofelementsthatdefineterrorismviolence,civilian
victims,feardoesnotspecifytheperpetrators.Thesemaybeindifferentlyradicalgroupsofthe
rightorleft,military,paramilitary,governmental,ornongovernmentalorganizations.Themedia
unquestionablyplayacentralroleinpromotingsuchfear.Whenfearmongeringisdeliberate,the
mediathatpracticeitcouldthemselvesbeconsideredterroristorganizations,justascouldother
fomentingorganizations,suchasgovernmentbureaus(whatBadioucallsbureaucraticterrorism
[10])andadhocgroupsofindividualswhomaybetheperpetrators,asintheOklahomaCity
bombing.Itisimportanttorecognizethescopeofterrorism,sincelabelingorganizationsasterrorist
becausetheyuseorthreatenviolencetowardacivilianpopulation,regardlessoftheirplaceinthe
socialorder,isrevealingandsobering:theyarenotnecessarilymarginal.Recognizingthewide
rangeofsourcesofterrorismhelpsavoidselfrighteousexclusions.
ItisimportanttorealizethattheuseofterrorisnotconfinedtoAsiaortheMiddleEast.Terror,infact,
hasbecomeastandardpracticeatthepresentstageofworldhistory.Totalitarianstatesknowwell
thatterrorizingapopulationisthemosteffectivewayofcontrollingit,farmorepotentthanovert
force.Wecanrecognizetheclimateoffearandterrorthathasspreadnotonlythroughoutregionsin
theAfrican,Asian,andSouthAmericancontinentsitisbeingdeliberatelyimplementedinWestern
industrializednations,aswell,bytheuseofsocallednationalsecuritymeasures.Indeed,ifstate
terrorweremadevisible,itwouldobscuretheindividualactsofterrorthathaveachievedsuch
notorietytoday.[11]
Actsofterrorismareappallinglyinventiveandtheirrangeisextreme.Theyextendfromsuicide
bombersintheMiddleEastandthereleaseofthenervegassarinintheTokyosubwaybythe
4/12
religiouscultAumShinrikyoanditsattemptsatbiologicalterrorismtothe9/11suicideplanecrashes
perpetratedbyAlQaida.Butwecannotexcludestateterrorisminthisportrayal:theuseofovert
policeactionandmilitaryforcetocontrolsocialactivities,gangsdispatchedtofomentsocialviolence,
andsecretpolicetoinstillfear.Andthereisalsotheincreasinglysophisticatedpropagandisticuseof
themediamagazinesandnewspapers,TVtalkshowsandnewsbroadcaststoproliferatefalse
information,obscureanddistortcurrentevents,andinstillinsecurity.Thisisnoreignofterrorweare
livinginanageofterror.
2. CanTerrorismBeJustified?
Thescopeofterrorismis,then,surprisinglylargeanditsdefinitionsurprisinglyinclusive.Atthesame
timeitisimportanttorecognizethedifferencebetweenterrorismandterrorandnottoconfusethe
two.Terrorismis,aswehaveseen,thecalculateduseofviolenceorthreatofviolenceagainsta
civilianpopulationwiththeintentofcausingwidespreadfearforpoliticalpurposes.Terror,onthe
otherhand,istheoverpoweringemotionofintensefear.Moreaboutthislater.WhatIamconcerned
withjustnowisterrorism,notterror,assuch.
Canterrorismeverbejustified?Whatmakesterrorismsomorallyappallingisthatitsvictimsare
circumstantial,uninvolved,andobliviousofwhatishappening.Itisaviciouslotterywithequal
opportunitytolose.Thedevastatingresultsofterroristactsarenotmuchdifferentfromthesocalled
collateraldamagesufferedbycivilianpopulationsthroughoutthewholehistoryofwarfare.Violence
visiteddeliberatelyonaninnocent,circumstantialpopulationcondemnsitasoneofthemostheinous
socialwrongs,irrespectiveofanyselfjustifyingmotives.Forthisreasonterrorismcanneverbe
vindicated,andterrorismpracticedbyastateisnomoreexemptfrommoralcondemnationthan
whenusedasatacticbyapoliticalorreligiousgroup.
Butapartfromthequestionofwhetherterrorismiseverjustifiable,itmustnonethelessberecognized
andunderstood.Visibleandboldactsofterrorismforceustoacknowledgethatsuchactsofviolence
arenotaberrationscommittedbydeludedindividualsbutsocialactionsdeliberatelyperpetratedby
groupsandforclearreasons.Theymaybethearmsofstateoppressionortheymayrepresent
politicaloppositiontowhatisperceivedascorrelativeinjustice.Terroristactsareoftencommittedin
responsetothesocialviolenceofexploitationoroppressionofonepopulationgroupbyanother.Yet
oneformofviolencecannotbeselectivelyjustifiedoveragainstanother.Bybeingdirectedagainst
unwittingvictims,allsuchactionsaremorallyflawed.Aviolentactcommittedinresponsetoother
actsofviolenceisnottherebyexonerated:bothareequallycondemnable.Canterrorismbe
consideredmorallyjustifiablewhenitistheonlyavailablemeanstoapoliticalorideologicalend,
whenthereisnoalternativewaytoredressaninjustice?Thisisthecriticalmoralquestionandcentral
tounderstandingterrorism.
Thequestionofthejustifiabilityofterrorismdoesnot,however,answertheaestheticquestion:are
aestheticvaluespresentinterroristacts?Isthereanaestheticsofterrorism?What,indeed,has
terrorismtodowithaestheticsatall?Itisnecessarytoconfrontthesequestionsbecauseactsof
terrorismmakeeffectiveuseofthetechniquesandskillsofartandpossessaestheticforce.Yethow
canwespeakofpoliticalactssuchasterrorisminthesamebreathasartandtheaesthetic?Mustart
5/12
thatusesviolencetoconveyamoralmessageandmakeamoraljudgmentbecondemnedwhenthat
messagecouldnotbemadeinanyotherway?Wearriveagainatthesamemoraldilemma.Thisisa
questionthatmustbefacedbyanyargumentfortruedemocracy,thepoliticalformthatclaimsto
providemeansforpeacefulsocialchange.[12]Democracyorterrorism?
Theuseofterrorismasapoliticalactthusraisesdifficultaestheticaswellasmoralissues,anditis
importanttounderstandterrorism,notjusttocondemnit.Indeed,consideringterrorismfroman
aestheticvantagepointcancastconsiderablelightonsuchacts.Fortheseeventsareperceptually
powerful,engagingnotonlythevisualbutallthesenses.Theyareaestheticbecauseoftheirsensory
force.Thesearedesperateactscommittedinordertomakeamoralandpoliticalstatementthrough
theiraesthetic,thatis,theirsensoryimpact.Moreover,theirinherentpoliticalimportisadramatic
rejectionofthetraditionaldifferencebetweenartandreality,afeaturetheyhaveincommonwiththe
modernarts.
Sinceaestheticscentersondirectsensoryperception,itisclearthatactsofterrorismhavepowerful
aestheticforce.Allthosewhoexperiencetheeffectsofterrorismitschancevictims,theirrelatives
andassociates,theorganizationsandinstitutionsthataredamaged,thegeneralpublic,thesocial
orderallcanattesttoitsaestheticimpact.Humanvaluesandthevalueofhumansareatstake,
butwecannotmeasuresuchvaluequantitatively.Howisitpossibletocompareorjudgeexperience?
Isaphysicalactofterrorismsuchasasuicidebombingworsethantherepressionofawhole
populationbyagovernmentpolicyinstitutedinthenameofsecurity,causingwidespreadfearand
requiringovertactsofbrutalitytoenforceit?Isadeliberatelyplannedriotdesignedtomanipulatea
populationlessterrifyingthan,say,anattempttopoisonapublicwatersupply?Here,Ithink,
differencesinconditions,means,andconsequencesneedtobeidentifiedandeachsituation
appraisedonitsowntermsandnotbysomegeneralformula.Atthesametimeandmoreimportant,
suchalternativesaremorallyunacceptableaswellasrationallyirresolvable.Thereisnochoice
betweenHitlerandPolPot.
Unlikeactsofsabotage,actsofterrorismhavenodirectmilitarytarget.Perhapsitcanbesaidthatin
thisrespecttheymirrorthelargelyselfcontainedcharacterofart.Andwhatsortofaestheticvalue
canterrorismhave?[T]hetragicinreallifewillnecessarilyhaveanaestheticdimensionaslongas
thesensibilityofthesubjectcomesintoplaybyjudgingsomethingasbeingtragic.[13]Isthereart
interrorism?Itcannotbedeniedthatmuchofthepoliticaleffectivenessofterroristactscomesfrom
theircarefullyplannedaestheticimpact.Indeed,theireffectisprimarily,oftenspectacularlytheatrical.
Wecaninfactsaythatsuchactionsaredeliberatelydesignedtobehighdrama.Inthissense,then,
istheateranylessappropriateawaytodescribeaspectacularactofterrorismthanitistodesignate
militaryactivities?Perhapsitnowbecomesunderstandablehowanartistcouldconsideraterrorist
actaworkofart.
Canterrorismhavepositivemoralvalue?Simpleascriptionsofpositiveandnegativevaluenolonger
fit.Suchmorallycomplexsituationsdemandadifferentkindofanalysis.Ifaterroristactcontributesto
achievingsocialjustice,canweevenaskwhetheritismorallypositiveornegative?AKantian
analysiswouldfinditnegative,forsuchactionscannotbeuniversalized.Autilitariananalysiswould
6/12
finditpositivetotheextentitcontributestopoliticalorsocialreform,ifitdoesindeedhavethat
consequence,ratherthantheredoubleduseofstateterror.Butcanweevenpresumetobalance
immediatepain,death,anddestructionagainstfuturebenefits?
Neitheroftheseanalysesresolvestheissue.Universalizabilityisanethicalprincipleandalogical
desideratumbutitisnotaxiomaticandexemptfromcriticalreflection.Andtoconsiderconsequences
onlyselectivelyiseffectivelytodisregardtheirwiderangingfallout.Moreover,failingtoacknowledge
thefullscopeofconsequencescontinuesthecommonpracticeofhidingbehindmoralprinciplesat
humancost.Mostimportantisthefurtherconsiderationthatmeansandendsareneverseparable.
Whatkindofsocietycanemergefromterrorinducedchange?Thoughtheintentofterroristaction
maybethegoalofhumanliberation,theshorttermeffectsareunavoidablynegative.Anditslong
termeffects?
Itisclearthatthemoralissuesterrorismraisesarecomplex.Intraditionaltermsthejudgmentmay
seemclear,butunderfullconsiderationitbecomesambiguous.Asinwarfarewhereeveryoneclaims
right,justiceisoneverysideandso,too,isinjustice.Thepainofanenemyisnolessgreatthan
onesown.Lifelostisalostlife,nomatterwhoselifeitis.
Isaspectacularterroristactaestheticallynegativeorpositive?Itmustbeconsideredpositive
becauseofitsdramaticforce.If,however,fearandterroroverpowerperceptualexperience,notonly
initsunwilling"participants"butalsoinitslarger"audience,sothattheyfeelinactualdanger,a
terroristactexceedsthepossibilityofaestheticexperienceandsoisaestheticallynegative.[14]So
aesthetically,too,terrorismisindeterminate.Suchsituationsseem,then,tobeambiguousboth
morallyandaesthetically.
Howaterroristactcanbemorallypositiveinanysensemaybedifficulttosee.Wemust
acknowledgethatthestrategyoftheactsandthemotivesoftheactorsmaybeguidedbythegoals
ofliberation,ofamorejustsocialorder,ofanendtooppressionandexploitation,andotherhumane
objectives.Buttheymayalsobeguidedbytheintenttopreservepowerandthesocialandeconomic
privilegesthataccompanyit.Doanyendseverjustifyterroristmeans?Theirmorallyreprehensible
effectsaresoblatantthatitseemsinconceivablethatanygoal,howevernoble,couldexonerate
them.Onecannotchoosebetweentwoincommensurablewrongs.Atthesametime,evenifa
terroristactcouldclaimtobemorallypositivewhichIdonotbelieveispossible,doesthisjustifyits
aestheticnegativity?Moralityandaestheticsarenoteasilydistinguishedhere.Painanddelightare
bothinherentlymoralandaesthetic:Thesameactcanbebothmorallyandaestheticallypositiveor
negative,forthemoralandtheaestheticmaybefullyinterdependent,inseparablyfused.Thevery
perpetrationofaterroristactisatthesametimebothaestheticandmoral,spectacularlydestructive.
Generalitiespalebeforetheintenseparticularityofterroristacts.Everyincidenthasitsunique
conditionsandnologicaldecisionprocedureseemspossible.Doesthesheerscopeandforceofa
terroristactplaceitinanewanddifferentcategory?Justaswecannotmeasureaestheticpleasure
orgradeworksofart,fearandterrorarenottrulyquantifiable.Norareconsequencesfully
determinable.Andbecauseboththeirscopeandtheirintensitycannotbespecifiedprecisely,they
aretrulyinconceivable.Thereisaconceptinaestheticsthatdenotesexperiencesooverwhelming
7/12
thatitexceedscomprehensionthesublime,anditisworthconsideringwhetherthesublimecould
conceivablybeappliedtoactsofterrorism.
3. TheNegativeSublime
Thesublimeisatheorythatreflectswithgreatdiscernmentonadistinctivekindofaesthetic
experience.Whilethesublimebecameprominentintheeighteenthcenturyasakeydimensioninthe
developmentofaesthetictheory,ithasbecomeincreasinglyimportantinrecentaestheticdiscourse.
ThestartingpointisusuallyKantsaccount,althoughKantwasnotthefirsttoelaborateatheoryof
thisdistinctivemodeofaestheticapprehension.Burkesdiscussionofthesublimehadcomehalfa
centurybefore,[15]andwhileKantsformulationhasdominatedsubsequentdiscussions,Burkes
observationsareparticularlygermanetothepresentone.ForaccordingtoBurke,thecentralfeature
ofthesublimeisterror.Themostpowerfulpassioncausedbythesublimeinnature,hestates,is
astonishment,astateofmindwithanelementofhorrorinwhichallotherthoughtsaresuspended.
Fearattheprospectofpainordangerfreezesthecapacitytoreasonandactandevokesthe
overpoweringfeelingofterror.Asthestrongestemotionwhichthemindiscapableoffeeling,Burke
maintainedthatthefeelingofterrorisaprincipalsourceofthesublime:[W]hateverisqualifiedto
causeterror,isafoundationcapableofthesublime.[16]And,Indeed,terrorisinallcases
whatsoever,eithermoreopenlyorlatentlytherulingprincipleofthesublime.[17]Burkedescribed
manyemotionsassociatedwiththesublimeandtheconditionsunderwhichthesublimemaybe
experienced,andhecitedmanyinstancesofterrorincitedbyfear.Hisanalysis,however,didnot
proceedbeyondsuchdescriptions.
Kant,too,recognizedfearasafeatureofthedynamicalsublime.[18]IncontrastwithBurke,Kant
developedanelaboratetheoryilluminatedbyadistinctionbetweenmathematicalanddynamical
sublime.Inthefirst,themagnitudeoftheabsolutelygreatisameasurethatthemindcannotwholly
encompass.[19]Appliedtoaterroristact,itseffectsandconsequencescannotbefullydescribedor
evenmentallyencompassedandareincommensurable.Itsmaterialconsequencesintheformof
physicaldestructionandsocialdisruption,thescopeofthehumananguishinflicted,andthe
protectivemeasuresandreciprocalviolencewreakeduponsocietyinreactioncanneverbefully
enumerated.Itshumanconsequencesareimmeasurablebecausetheyareincalculable.Wemay
indeedsaythatwecannotquantifythedestructiveforceofaterroristattack:itevokesthe
mathematicalsublime.
Thesecond,Kant'sdynamicalsublime,concernsthefearwefeelinresponsetotheenormousmight
ofnature,althoughwemustnonethelessfeelsecureandunthreatened,abletoriseabovethatfear
andnotbesubjecttoit.Ironically,evenwar,Kantavers,hassomethingsublimeinitifcarriedonwith
orderandrespectforcitizens'rights,[20]presumablybyprotectingnoncombatants.Intheplaceof
mightinKant'sdynamicalsublime,thesublimeinterrorismispresentintheintensityofphysical
force,initsengulfingemotionalpower,intheoverwhelmingpsychologicalpressureofthesituation.
LikeKantsdynamicalsublime,theeffectivenessofterrorismliesinitspotentialthreattosafetyandin
theveryinsecurityandsocialinstabilitythatresult.Interrorismsafetyisespeciallyequivocal:while
theremaybenoncombatants,everyoneisvulnerable.Theactualvictimsarebutsacrificiallambsfor
8/12
itseffectonthelargerpopulation.Anotherimportantdifferenceisinthefactthat,unlikethe
quantitativeformsoftheKantiansublimeinwhichbothmagnitudeandmight(asforce)mightseem
tobemeasurable,theintensityoftheterroristsublimeisalsoimmeasurableanditsdimensions
indeterminate.Anditrestsonconsequencesthatarequalitativelyindeterminableandthus
incomparable.Onlyintheircircumstancesandmeansaretheactsandeffectsofterrorism
distinguishable.Sinceboththescopeandtheintensityofterroristattacksarebeyondconception,
bothmorallyandaesthetically,weneedanewconcept,the"negativesublime,"astheirtruestand
mosteloquentidentification.
Becauseactsofterrorismeludemeaningfulquantitativedetermination,wemustfurtheracknowledge
theirmoralandaestheticincommensurability,indeed,theirveryinconceivability.Perhapstheonly
conceptthatcanfullycategorizethemisthenegativesublime.Liketheaesthetic,thesublimeisnot
necessarilyapositivedeterminationbutamodeofexperience.Hencetocallsuchactsofterrorism
thenegativesublimeisnotanoxymoronbuttherecognitionofnegativitywhoseenormitycannotbe
encompassedineithermagnitudeorforce.Theuniquenessofsuchextremeactionsrendersthem
capableofdescriptiononly.Onemightclaimthatanactofterrorismexemplifiesthepostmodern
sublimeasLyotarddescribedit,inmakingtheunpresentableperceptible.[21]Andbecausethe
moralandtheaestheticareinseparablehere,thenegativesublimeincursequivalentaestheticand
moralvalue.Thatthemoralisalsoaestheticmakesitevenmoreintolerable.Deathistheultimate
humanloss,andbodycountsandstatisticsaredeceptivelyspecificandimpersonal.Suchqualitative
consequencesasthehumansufferingfromextremeactsofterrorismarebeyondmeasure."Afterthe
firstdeath,thereisnoother."[22]
Recognizingtheaestheticinactsofterrorism,evenapositiveaesthetic,doesnotcondoneorjustify
suchaction,forinterrorismtheaestheticneverstandsalone.Recognizingitspresencemayhelpus
understandthepeculiarfascinationthatthepublichaswithsucheventsofworldtheater.Theseare
indeedactsofhighdramathatfascinateusbytheirverysublimity.[23]Butthetheatricalforcefulness
thatimpressesuswiththeirimageisindissolublyboundupwiththeirmoralnegativity,andidentifying
themasthenegativesublimeistocondemnthembeyondallmeasure.Asanagenthereinthesocial
sphere,artaffectstheworlddirectly.Indeed,byattackingreality,artbecomesreality.[24]
Terrorismdramaticallyexposestheinseparabilityofthemoralandtheaesthetic,yetitisanextreme
formofwhatisalwaysthecase.Utopianthought,toturntotheothersideofthenormativeledger,
alsohasastrongaestheticcomponent.Utopianismispervadedbymoralvaluesofsocialand
environmentalharmonyandfulfillment.Itsgoaloffacilitatinglivingthatisdeeplysatisfyingthrough
thefruitfulexerciseofhumancapacitiesisasaestheticasitismoral.Toconformtothetraditionthat
separatestheaestheticfromthemoralmirrorsitssegregationfromeverydaylifeandconstrictsits
force.Letusseethepicturewholeandnotinparts.
ArnoldBerleant
ab@contempaesthetics.org
ArnoldBerleantisProfessor(Emeritus)atLongIslandUniversityandFoundingEditorofthisjournal.
PublishedNovember14,2009.
9/12
Endnotes
Thisessaywillappearinmybook,SenseandSensibility:TheAestheticTransformationoftheHuman
World(Exeter:ImprintAcademic,forthcoming2010).Iwouldliketothanktheanonymousreviewers
forContemporaryAestheticsfortheirhelpfulcomments.
[1]KatyaMandoki,EverydayAesthetics:Prosaics,thePlanofCultureandSocialIdentities(Ashgate,
2007),p.42.
[2]RecentworkincludesKatyaMandoki,op.cit.YurikoSaito,EverydayAesthetics(Oxford:Oxford
UniversityPress,2007).)TheAestheticsofEverydayLife,ed.AndrewLightandJonathanM.Smith
(NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress,2005).
[3]ArnoldBerleant,ArtandEngagement(Philadelphia:Temple,1992),p.40.
[4]ImmanuelKant,CritiqueofJudgment,(J.H.Bernard(NewYork:Hafner,1951)4.SeeA.
Berleant,"AestheticsandtheContemporaryArts,TheJournalofAestheticsandArtCriticism,XXIX,
2(Winterl970),l55l68.ReprintedinArnoldBerleant,RethinkingAesthetics,RogueEssayson
AestheticsandtheArts(Aldershot:Ashgate,2004),ch.4.
[5]TheRepublicBk.II,377A382Bk.III,376E403B.
[6]ImmanuelKant,op.cit.,FirstBook,25.
[7]Developingsuchanaesthetichasbeentheincentiveofmostofmypreviouswork.Seeespecially
RethinkingAesthetics,RogueEssaysonAestheticsandtheArts (Aldershot:Ashgate,2004),Artand
Engagement(Philadelphia:TempleUniversityPress,1991),andTheAestheticField:A
PhenomenologyofAestheticExperience(Springfield,Ill.:C.C.Thomasl970).Second(electronic)
edition,withanewPreface)2000).
[8]Stockhausen,citedinEmmanouilAretoulakis,"AestheticAppreciation,Ethics,and9/11,"
ContemporaryAestheticsVol.6(2008),sect.1.Hirst,aBritishartist,calledtheSeptember11th
terroristattacks"avisuallystunningartwork."Loc.cit..Aretoulakisarguesthat"thereisaneedfor
aestheticappreciationwhencontemplatingaviolenteventsuchasthe9/11terroristattacks.Whatis
more,appreciationofthebeautiful,evenincaseofa9/11,seemsnecessarybecauseitisakeyto
establishinganethicalstancetowardsterror,life,andart.Itshouldbestressedthatindependent
aestheticexperienceisnotimportantinitselfbutasameanstocultivatinganauthenticmoraland
ethicaljudgment."MydiscussionofterrorismwasstimulatedbyAretoulakis'sthoughtfulandbalanced
considerationoftheaestheticsignificanceofthe9/11attacks.
[9]SeeWalterLaqueur,OriginsofTerrorism:Psychologies,Ideologies,Theologies,StatesofMind,
WoodrowWilsonCenterPress,1998.
[10]AlainBadiou,TheMeaningofSarkozy(London&NewYork:Verso,2008),p.92.
[11]OneisremindedofHobbes'characterizationofthenatureofwarasnotactualfightingbut"inthe
10/12
knowndispositionthereto,"adescriptionthatappliesnotonlytowhathasbeencalleda"coldwar"
butequallytoasocietyinastateofcontinualfearandthuseasilymovedtoviolence.SeeThomas
Hobbes,Leviathan(1660),ch.13.
[12]ThisisaproblemthatstandsapartfromtheaestheticquestionsIamdealingwithhereand
clearlyrequiresitsownseparatetreatment.Asaversionofthemeansendproblem,ithaslong
historyofphilosophicaldebate.
[13]Mandoki,loc.cit.
[14]BothBurkeandKantnotedtheimpossibilityofexperiencingthesublimewhenonessafetyisat
risk.Cf.Kant,CritiqueofJudgment,28.
[15]EdmundBurke,PhilosophicalInquiryintotheOriginofourIdeasoftheSublimeandBeautiful
(1757)(Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,1990).BurkedidnotoriginatetheconceptatreatiseOnthe
SublimeisattributedtoLonginus,inthethirdcenturyCE,althoughitsauthorshipanddateof
compositionhavebeencontested.
[16]Burke,ibid.,PartOne,SectionVIIPartTwo,SectionsIandIIPartIV,SectionIIIpp.36,5354,
119.
[17]Ibid.,PartTwo,SectionII,p.54.
[18]CritiqueofJudgment,28.
[19]Ibid.,27.
[20]Ibid.,28."Waritself,ifitiscarriedonwithorderandwithasacredrespectfortherightsof
citizens,hassomethingsublimeinit,andmakesthedispositionofthepeoplewhocarryitonthus
onlythemoresublime,themorenumerousarethedangerstowhichtheyareexposedandin
respectofwhichtheybehavewithcourage."p.102.
[21]ThereisaresemblanceheretoLyotardscharacterizationofthesublimeasmaking`the
unpresentableperceptible.Theartobjectnolongerbendsitselftomodels,buttriestopresentthe
factthatthereisanunpresentable.Cf.JeanFranoisLyotard,ThePostmodernCondition:A
ReportonKnowledge(1979)(Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,1984),p.81Thesublime
andtheavantgarde,inTheLyotardReader,ed.AndrewBenjamin(Blackwell:Cambridge,MA,
1989),p.207.
[22]"ARefusaltoMourntheDeath,byFire,ofaChildinLondon,"inTheCollectedPoemsofDylan
Thomas(NewYork:NewDirections,1957),p.112.
[23]farfromarticulatingtheneedofpersonalexpressionontheartisticlevel,artbecomesfully
politicizedasanagencythatactsonitsowninthesocialsphere,thusenablingitselftointeractwith
andaffecttheworlddirectly.Artetoulakis,op.cit.,sect.4.Again,Ifwedonotmerelysettleinto
thinkingofartaspersonalexpressionwithinthecanonicallyboundeddomainoftheaesthetic,andwe
11/12
ascribetoartanactiveinvolvementthenwebetterbereadytocometotermswithartasarealmin
whichhumanityexercisesitsutmostcreative/destructivepotential,andnotinthesocalled(since
Hegel)worldofthespiritbutintheworlditself.StathisGourgouris,Transformation,Not
Transcendence,Boundary231.2(2004):5579.QuotedinAretoulakis,op.cit.
[24]Aretoulakis,op.cit.,sect.5.KatyaMandokisawitplainly:Whatmustbenotedisthatartand
reality,likeaestheticsandtheeveryday,aretotallyentwined,notbecauseoftheexplicitwillofthe
artist,butbecausethereisnothingfurther,beneathorbeyondreality.Evendreamsarereal,as
dreams.Theefforttouniteartrealityis,therefore,unnecessary.Moreover,whenartmanifestsitself
asamechanismforevasionorforemancipationtheyarefatallyandirremediablyimmersedin
reality,whetherindexicallypointingatitbytheevasionitself(silenceisveryeloquent)orbyassuming
particularsidesforcriticismoremancipation.Mandoki,op.cit.,pp.1516.
[25]Ihavecalledsuchajoiningoftheaestheticandtheethicalhumanisticfunction.Seemyessay,
AestheticFunction,inArnoldBerleant,LivingintheLandscape:TowardanAestheticsof
Environment(Lawrence:UniversityPressofKansas,1997).
12/12

Art, Terrorism and The Negative Sublime

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Art, Terrorism and The Negative Sublime

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Art,TerrorismandtheNegativeSublime

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi