TA's Question on Carlson

Allen Carlson quotes Hepburn in saying that people who have the wrong sort of education or aren't in the right mindset to appreciate nature will either pay little heed to it or will look at it "the wrong way". Carlson seems to imply that for each setting there is a "right" mindset to have and way to view the landscape/ flower/ summer afternoon. 

Is this true? Or is it possible that there are multiple "right" ways to view a natural environment? Or is there no "right" way and perhaps only shades of appreciation? 


I think Carlson has a good point here.  In the beginning of his writing, he discusses points of aspection.  His main point here, is that one must look at different styles of art, or in this case, nature, in order to fully appreciate and take from the observation that one undergoes.  I do not think Carlson implies that there is a right and wrong way to look at nature, or a style of art, merely that one should take into account the intents of the author, or creator, or in nature's case, the fact that there is no human creator.  As he suggests through a quotation from Ziff, one would not "drink brandy the way you drink beer...".

"Works of different particular types have different kinds of boundaries, have different foci of aesthetic significance, and perhaps most important demand different acts of aspection" (Carlson, 538).  

Carlson simply uses this theory of points of aspection to premise the fact that one must look for certain traits in the type of art they are viewing.  For example, if one were to attend an art gallery exhibiting the latest contemporary works of modern formalists, preparation to observe colors and contours of lines would be necessary to fully enjoy the gallery.  Carlson states that this is what one must do with nature, or must not do.  As he states earlier, we know what to look for in art, because we as humans have created it.  Nature on the other hand, was not created by humans, and has not the intentional landscape of a painting.  He then bases this to state that, natural landscape has "indeterminate form."  This premises the rest of his argument for dismissing the object theory and the landscape theory as being helpful, yet incomplete.  While Carlson would not claim that there is but one right answer to a piece of art, or nature, he is suggesting that observing with the right mindset is key to fully understanding and appreciating art, or nature.