Hume offers a quite satisfying explanation for the changes of taste or judgement over time, by saying that these changes were not specifically correct judgments in the first place. He can accredit the aesthetic value to a work of art, but says that these fads will come and go over time, and that time alone will reveal the true art, and the true critics.
"Just expressions of passion and nature are sure, after a little time to gain public applause, which they maintain for ever. Aristotle, and Plato, and Epicurus, and Descartes, may successively yield to each other: But Terence and Virgil maintain an universal, undisputed empire over the minds of men" (Hume, 110).
Hume explains that we will always have art of passion and significance, and they will succeed each other over time, yet true works of merit will stand the test of time. He states later, that this especially proves to be true when some significant works with both aesthetic appeal and true value are created; one part eventually falls away, yet the other, remains, an aspect of praise. This is a very good example of how Hume would distinguish what is truly good art.
"The abstract philosophy of Cicero has lost its credit: The vehemence of his oratory is still the object of our admiration" (Hume, 110).
No comments:
Post a Comment