Aesthetics of Nature

I feel that Jacob's post on aesthetics and the aesthetic appreciation of nature fairly well encapsulates my own view on the aesthetic appreciation of nature, so I will not go in to detail in that here. In sum, his argument is, "aesthetic responses are emotional responses to what we see," therefore when we have an emotional response to our perception of nature, it is an aesthetic response. I would like to use this post to suggest something that Carlson found problematic: we do not know what to appreciate aesthetically in regards to nature.

I believe that this question is a very simple one to answer. It can be answered thus: whatever sense is most useful at the time. This may seem vague, but a few examples should serve to illustrate the point.

Let us take the classic example of the waterfall to begin with. Part of the aesthetic experience would certainly be seeing it. The act of watching the water rushing ever downwards can be quite an emotional ride. It is compounded by the sound, the mighty roar of the water as it cascades downward. Feel, scent, and perhaps even taste may come in to play depending on distance from the base, as a result of the mist that sometimes rises up at the base of waterfalls.

For another example, take a walk through the woods. Part of the aesthetic experience is, again, visual, in terms of the flora and fauna that one may spot on the trail. Aural comes in to play through experiences such as the rustle of leaves by a breeze, or the song of birds. The air itself can provide an aesthetic experience, if it is clean. Feel can come through touching trees along the way, or simply from the act of walking on the often soft ground of a forest.

A favorite example of mine is lying in a yard cloud-gazing. The visual experience is, of course, looking up at the sky. Aural experience can be in the same vein as the forest -- breeze and birdsong, for example. The physical experience is the feel of the grass on one's back, perhaps the feel of bugs crawling across the skin, or the warmth of the sun's light.

In all cases, it is not particularly difficult to find which sense to use. It is simply a matter of being open to receiving the stimuli that nature has to offer. There need be no "set in stone" way to aesthetically appreciate nature.

To end with a question: Do we really need to "know" how to aesthetically appreciate something?