I close by examining some applications of the principles I’ve defended. Beginning with nature appreciation, I suggest that in this realm suitability is trumped by adaptive or evolutionary factors making aspects of our appreciation hard-wired. Next I consider some puzzles that arise for the arts of literature, film, and architecture. These stem from the indeterminateness of literature that requires filling in, the complexity of movies that demands multitasking, and the functionality of architecture that puts an apparent premium on engagement and use. I then turn to identity politics and their bearing on criticism in the arts. While many of us take pride in our racial, ethnic, religious and other origins and identities, some of these categories are marked by sharp differences of power and privilege. I explore the permissibility of crossing these boundaries in creating or critiquing art. Lastly I take up a pair of issues, bad art and mean critics. I argue that we cannot formulate general criteria for bad art. Yet there are unworthy works. Given a harsh or dismissive review, if prejudice has not contributed and the suitability requirement has not been overlooked, then the review is a legitimate response that can enlighten us about the work.
Chicago Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.