ART AND MORALITY

It is one thing to say that a piece of art is aesthetically pleasing or valuable. Another is to
assert that it is morally righteous or that it has the power to improve people's moral
character. The two types of judgements are distinct from one another, although they are not
wholly unrelated.

The relationship between art and morality has been a topic of philosophical inquiry for
centuries. The question of whether art has a moral responsibility to promote ethical values,
or whether it should be free from any moral constraints and judged solely on its aesthetic
qualities, is a complex and multifaceted one that has been debated by philosophers, artists,
and critics for centuries.

There are three distinct perspectives on how art and morality interact:
 Moralism
 Aestheticism
 Mixed Positions

MORALISM

This point of view holds that morality is the only or major purpose of art. The moralist views
art that does not foster the desired kind of moral influence with suspicion and occasionally
with grudging tolerance of its existence because it instills in people unconventional ideas,
disturbs and disquiets because it tends to emphasise individuality rather than conformity,
and is frequently produced as a result of rebellion or disillusionment with the status quo. It
is accepted as a harmless pleasure that can be tolerated if it does not occupy too much of
the viewer's attention when it does not morally touch people in any manner (for example,
much nonrepresentational painting). It is only regarded favourably if it advances or
strengthens the moral attitudes and beliefs that the moralist holds dear.

Plato is the first champion in the Western world of the moralistic view of art. Plato admired
the poets and was himself something of a poet, but, when he was founding (on paper) his
ideal state, he was convinced that much art, even some passages in Homer, tended to have
an evil influence upon the young and impressionable, and accordingly he decided that they
must be banned. Passages that spoke ill or questioningly of the gods, passages containing
excessive sexual passion (and all works that would today be described as pornographic), and
even passages of music that were disturbing to the soul or the senses were
all condemned to the same fate. 

Plato’s concern here was with the purity of soul of the persons who would become members
of the council of rulers of the state; he was not concerned with censorship for the masses,
but, since one could not predict which young people would pass the series of examinations
required for membership in the council of rulers and since it was (and is) practically
impossible to restrict access to works of art to a certain group, the censorship, he decided,
would have to be universal.
The most famous champion of the moralistic view of art in modern times is Tolstoy. Long
after he had finished writing his novels, he fell under the influence of pre-church Christianity,
the principal tenet of which was the fellowship of all humans. This one idea became such
an obsession with him that everything else, including the pursuit of art to which he had
devoted his life, became subordinate to it. Almost all the literature of his own time, including
all his own novels, he condemned as inimical to human fellowship by emphasizing class
distinction and pitting one group of humankind against another.

ARGUMENTS PUT FORTH BY THE SUPPORTERS OF MORALISM ARE:

Supporters of moralism of art argue that art has a moral responsibility to promote ethical
values and inspire positive change in society. Here are some of the arguments put forth by
them:

1. Art can promote ethical values: Supporters of moralism of art argue that art has the
power to promote ethical values by presenting ethical dilemmas and exploring moral issues
in a way that encourages reflection and critical thinking. Art can inspire empathy and
compassion by depicting the human experience and promoting understanding of different
perspectives and cultures.

2. Art reflects and shapes moral values: Supporters of moralism of art argue that art cannot
be divorced from its social and cultural context, and that it inevitably reflects and shapes
moral values and beliefs. Art is created by humans, and as such, it is always shaped by the
social and cultural norms of the society in which it is produced. Therefore, it is impossible to
separate art from its ethical implications.

3. Art has a social function: Supporters of moralism of art argue that art has a social function
and that it can be used as a tool for social change. Art can bring attention to social issues and
promote social justice causes. It can also provide a platform for marginalized voices to be
heard and promote understanding and empathy for those who are often overlooked or
mistreated.

4. Art can inspire action: Supporters of moralism of art argue that art can inspire action by
prompting viewers to reflect on their own moral values and encouraging them to take action
to address ethical issues. Art can motivate people to make positive changes in their lives and
in their communities.

5. Art should be accountable: Supporters of moralism of art argue that art should be
accountable for its ethical implications and that artists have a responsibility to consider the
ethical implications of their work. Artists should be aware of the potential impact of their
work on society and should strive to create art that promotes ethical values and inspires
positive change.

AESTHETICISM

Aestheticism, the idea that morality (and everything else) should be the handmaiden of art
rather than morality (and everything else) being the handmaiden of art, is diametrically
opposed to the moralistic viewpoint.  The proponents of this view hold that the experience
of art is the most intense and pervasive experience available in human life and that nothing
should be allowed to interfere with it. If it conflicts with morality, so much the worse for
morality, and, if the masses fail to appreciate it or receive the experience it has to offer, so
much the worse for the masses.

The vital intensity of the aesthetic experience is the paramount goal in human life. If there
are morally undesirable effects of art, they do not really matter in comparison with this all-
important experience which art can give.

There is a plurality of values; aesthetic values, although far greater, admittedly, than most
persons realize, are still just a few among many. It is therefore necessary to consider the
relation of the values derived from art to the values derived from other things, such as the
conduct of life apart from art: no one can devote every waking hour to the pursuit of art,
even if for no other reason than the need for survival, and thus the values of
such mundane things as food and shelter have also to be considered.

ARGUMENTS PUT FORTH BY THE SUPPORTERS OF AESTHETICISM ARE:

Supporters of aestheticism of art argue that art should be free from any moral constraints
and should be judged solely on its aesthetic qualities. Here are some of the arguments put
forth by them:

1. Art is a form of expression: Supporters of aestheticism of art argue that art is primarily a
form of expression, and that it should not be limited by moral considerations. Artists should
be free to explore their own creative impulses without worrying about whether their work
conforms to certain ethical standards.

2. Aesthetic value is paramount: Supporters of aestheticism of art argue that the aesthetic
value of a work of art is paramount, and that it should be judged solely on its ability to
inspire and delight viewers. A work of art should be evaluated based on its formal qualities,
such as composition, color, and texture, rather than its moral implications.

3. Moral judgment is subjective: Supporters of aestheticism of art argue that moral

judgment is subjective, and that different people will have different opinions about what is
morally acceptable in a work of art. Therefore, it is not possible to impose a single set of
moral standards on all works of art.

4. Art should be free from censorship: Supporters of aestheticism of art argue that art
should be free from censorship and that artists should not be censored or punished for
creating works that challenge moral standards. Freedom of expression is a fundamental
right, and artists should be free to create art that explores controversial or taboo subjects
without fear of reprisal.
5. Art has no inherent moral value: Supporters of aestheticism of art argue that art has no
inherent moral value, and that it is up to individual viewers to interpret and assign meaning
to works of art. The meaning of a work of art is not determined by the artist's intentions, but
rather by the viewer's response to it. Therefore, it is not the artist's responsibility to promote
ethical values through their work.

MIXED POSITIONS

The moralistic and aesthetic positions are extremes, and the truth is likely to be found

somewhere between them. Indeed, art and morality are intimately related, and neither
functions wholly without the other. But to trace the precise relations between art and
morality is far from easy; for want of a better term, “interactionism” could be used to label
the view that aesthetic and moral values each have distinctive roles to play in the world but
that neither operates independently of the other.
 
The mixed position of art and morality recognizes that there is no clear-cut answer to the
question of whether art has a moral responsibility or whether it should be free from any
moral constraints. Instead, it takes a nuanced approach that acknowledges the complex and
multifaceted relationship between art and morality.

Those who hold a mixed position may argue that while art should be judged primarily on its
aesthetic qualities, it is impossible to separate art from its ethical implications entirely. They
may acknowledge that some works of art have a moral dimension that cannot be ignored,
and that artists have a responsibility to consider the ethical implications of their work.
However, they may also argue that art should not be judged solely on its ability to promote
ethical values, and that artists should be free to explore controversial or taboo subjects
without fear of censorship or reprisal.

In essence, the mixed position recognizes that art and morality are intertwined, and that it is
impossible to fully separate one from the other. While art can promote ethical values and
inspire positive change in society, it can also challenge moral standards and push the
boundaries of what is considered acceptable or moral. As such, the mixed position takes a
balanced approach that acknowledges the value of both aesthetic and ethical considerations
when evaluating works of art.