Oakeshott on the Nature and Place of Aesthetic Experience: A Critique

Abstract

The author of this chapter critiques Oakeshott's view of aesthetics as inconsistent, & despite his focus on the need for playfulness & " 'useless activity" for participation in the conversation of mankind, reveals his true nature as a linguistic realist. Oakeshott's evolution through his early writing on modes ("Experience and its Modes, The Voice of Poetry") leads to the conclusion that, for him, there is no single formula for the aesthetic. Poetry remains ambiguous, paradoxical & (like conversation), plural, yet works to signify or symbolize things in a reasonably objective manner. Although Oakeshott does have some postmodern affiliations, in the arena of declarative discourse he is a linguistic realist. The practical modes of science, history & practice are safe from his demand for nonsymbolic language. The idea that words themselves are unstable would be absurd, & a postmodern view of ordinary language as fiction (Derrida) would be accused of irrelevance. 14 References. J. Harwell