“The basic outline of Hartshorne’s aesthetic theory is the first task…The basic insight is that beauty is a mean among four intersecting poles of relation. On the x axis is the relation of depth, sublimity at one extreme and superficiality at the other, while on the y axis the relations of total unity and utter diversity are the extremes. Beauty is where these crossing concerns come into balance, where “harmony or unity-in-variety” is balanced by “intensity.” On the x axis, if an experience is too profound or deep for the experiencer, it will tend toward the sublime and away from the beautiful; if an experience is not deep enough, it tends toward the trivial and also away from beauty. Balanced intensity is a mean of depth and superficiality. Similarly, on the y axis, if an experience is characterized by too much order, it becomes merely tidy or neat, or even monotonous, at the extreme, while too much diversity in a single experience renders it chaotic. Beauty exists when an experience is adapted to the capacities and history of the experiencing being in such a way that the experience has both intensity and unity-in-variety in just the right proportion. This insight is key to Hartshorne’s aesthetics.”

The above passage comes from Randall Auxier’s review of Daniel Dombrowski’s book Divine Beauty: The Aesthetics of Charles Harshorne. I’m not very familiar with Hartshorne’s aesthetics but much of it seems familiar since I wager he got a lot of it from Whitehead. Hat tip to Leon Niemoczynski for turning me on to the review.

Tags:aestheticsAuxierbeautyDombrowskiexperienceHartshorneSublimewhitehead