Emotion, Ethics,
and Aesthetic Judgment: Reading Literature Through the Lens of Nussbaum,
Barthes, and Sontag
Aesthetes such as Roland Barthes and Susan
Sontag proclaim the immediate response of emotion of emotion as an aesthetic reality; this
reality reflects the role of emotion as an aesthetic value judgment, a sense of
ethics. This convergence of ethics and aesthetics, an aesthetics that betrays
emotions, lies at the heart of Martha C. Nussbaum’s assertion in Upheavals
of Thought that emotions are “intelligent responses to the perception of
value” (Upheavals 1). Thus Nussbaum, beginning her writing in the
nineteen-eighties, reflects the model of “against interpretation” that Barthes
and Sontag developed in the nineteen-sixties as an argument for the evolution away
from structural consideration in aesthetics. For Nussbaum, literature, as one
of many artistic endeavors including music and visual arts, does not merely
entertain or stimulate emotion—it provides a substantial method of the
development of ethics. Literary characters have both emotional and moral
responses, and the same is true of readers.
The emotional intensity found in many
passionate literary characters not only shows a sense of aesthetics but also reflects
deeper truths about human values., including ethical values. Nussbaum argues
that emotions are cognitive and include ethical values, a consideration that
she points out is as old as Aristotle. Emotions and ethics reveal what we care
about and how we understand our place in the world. In this light, a
character’s emotional response becomes an ethical issue, shaped by their social
context and moral understanding.
One such ethical dimension is Nussbaum’s
concern with the objectification of women in literature. In her essay
“Objectification,” she presents the compelling idea that women can sometimes
reclaim power through a self-conceived objectification. This duality—seeing
oneself as both subject and object—can allow a unique moral self to emerge.
Nussbaum illustrates this through D.H. Lawrence’s Lady Chatterley’s Lover,
where Lady Chatterley’s self-awareness marks a type of moral agency through
self-objectification (“Objectification” 213–39). Lady Chatterley’s act of
reclaiming one’s narrative, even in the context of a traditionally objectifying
society, intertwines ethical judgments with aesthetic representations and does
so with a sense of a new awakening.
This same pattern of ethical reevaluation
extends beyond gender to colonial critique. In her essay “Finely Aware and
Richly Responsible,” Nussbaum turns her attention to literary portrayals of
colonial societies—often depicted as heroic or civilizing—and reveals them
instead as ethically problematic (“Finely Aware”). The traditional narrative
valorizes colonial figures, but a deeper reading, informed by emotion and
ethics, reveals traditional figures of patriarchal colonization as “monstrous
villains.” The objectified subject—often a colonized character—must wrestle
with an imposed identity in a bid for self-determination. The reader, too,
becomes involved, forced to confront their own stance on objectification and
agency. The redear creates both an ethical and an aesthetic response to the
text through the power of emotional response.
This confluence of response—visceral and
moral—is central to how Roland Barthes understands the aesthetic experience. In
The Pleasure of the Text, Barthes writes, “Does writing in pleasure
guarantee my reader’s pleasure? Not at all… [But there is] a possibility of a
dialectics of desire, of an unpredictability of bliss” (Barthes, Pleasure
4). While Barthes stops short of overtly linking ethics with aesthetics, his
notion of a “dialectics of desire” suggests an overlapping concern with the
complexity of response. Emotional and aesthetic pleasure is not neutral, especially
when the text confronts readers with depictions of objectification, identity,
or power.
Nussbaum’s moral philosophy, linked to an
emotional/aesthetic response, corresponds to Barthes’ reader’s search for
pleasure in the text, and his student Susan Sontag’s insistence that immediate
experience be considered in determining meaning. In her essay “Against
Interpretation,” Sontag challenges readers to appreciate culture and literature
with immediacy and sensual responsiveness. Her critique of the modernist
overreliance on interpretation invites a return to the experience of art itself
(Sontag 95–104). For Sontag, aesthetic pleasure need not be subordinated to
meaning; it is a mode of understanding in its own right. Nussbaum shows how
this consideration links to a more traditional Aristotlean view of ethics and
emotions.
Barthes’s earlier work, Mythologies,
provides the intellectual bridge between mass culture and narrative myths. His
deconstruction of French cultural products of the 1950s paves the way for the
American interpretive revolutions of the 1960s such as those of Sontag. While
the emotionally charged novels of Hardy or Lawrence may seem a far cry from the
polished surfaces of French advertisements or Warhol’s factory images,
Barthes’s theories still enable us to approach all text, literary or popular, with
a layered sensibility. As he writes in “In the Ring,” myths mask ideology
through aesthetic gloss, which readers must work to uncover (Barthes, Mythologies
11–20). By applying Barthes’s insights to traditional literature, contemporary
readers can expand their approach to even the most emotionally intense passages
with a refined ethical lens.
Nussbaum calls for such an exploration in
the dramas of classical antiquity and the modernist novels of Henry James,
among others. She makes her individual viewpoints on the links between art and
ethics a central part of her explanation of emotional response. In doing so,
Nussbaum paves the way for the further use of the Barthes/Sontag aesthetic in
the interpretation of all literatures. In the viewpoints of Barthes, Sontag,
and Nussbaum, literature becomes not merely a mirror of life, but a crucible in
which the reader's values are tested and transformed.
Works Cited
Barthes, Roland.
“In the Ring.” Mythologies. (1957) Translated by Richard Howard and
Annette Lavers, Hill and Wang, 2012, pp. 11–20.
---. The
Pleasure of the Text. Translated by Richard Miller, Farrar, Straus, and
Giroux, 1975.
Nussbaum, Martha C.
“Finely Aware and Richly Responsible.” Love’s Knowledge: Essays on
Philosophy and Literature, Oxford University Press, 1990.
---. "Introduction."
Upheavals of Thought: The Intelligence of Emotions. Cambridge University
Press, 2001, pp. 1–16.
---. “Objectification.”
Sex and Social Justice, Oxford University Press, 1999. ProQuest Ebook
Central, pp. 213–239. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com.proxy.myunion.edu/lib/tui-ebooks/detail.action?docID=272685.
Sontag, Susan.
“Against Interpretation.” The Susan Sontag Reader, edited by Elizabeth
Hardwick, Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1984, pp. 95–104.
Nick Harris
Blog 7-3-2025
No comments:
Post a Comment