Book Reviews 419 simulates a personality by dramatizing how that per- painters have made the human body a privileged sonality came to be: we make the persona’s fate our subject matter. Sculptors from ancient Greece to own. When a pianist plays a classical score, the pi- Michelangelo and beyond to Degas and Rodin have anist’s own persona “becomes a vehicle for the per- made the body their central theme. Since the 1970s, sona whose career the music imagines” (p. 140). with the beginning of video art, and into the present, Kramer examines many familiar musical examples, video art, performance art, and installation art have largely Romantic, to bolster this approach. offered new platforms for reexamining the role of Kramer acknowledges that his remarks may be the body in human experience. In the process of de- viewed as arbitrary and too subjective, and he admits veloping their art, contemporary artists have raised that they may not even go deeper than a program interesting questions about the body. These queries note in their technical detail. He wants to speak per- have gone beyond early video artists’ narcissism to sonally, yet with a focus on “indispensable human asking such questions as: What is the body? How concerns, the stuff of real life” (p. 9). The musical does it fit into our identity? And how can the body examples are strongest from film and nineteenth- best be presented in contemporary art? While many century music, that is, those musical styles powered philosophers have contemplated the body, mainly in by melody. However, the serious challenge of listen- a role subordinate to and apart from the mind, few ing to late-twentieth-century and new music is part have so boldly proclaimed the primacy of the body of the reason that classical music’s appeal is fading, and the positive benefits of its cultivation as a means and it would be enlightening to hear his thoughts on for enhancing our experiences of the arts and indeed listening to difficult, contemporary pieces. all of life as has the philosopher Richard Shusterman. There are many moments of resonance, where Shusterman’s latest book, Body Consciousness: Kramer manages to articulate some of the deepest A Philosophy of Mindfulness and Somaesthetics,is feelings musicians have about classical music. He de- a continuation of his efforts to develop and de- scribes our sentience of musical works with affection, fend his theory of somaesthetics. Somaesthetics is noting that great works gather a life of their own a form of reflective bodily awareness intended to over the years, acquiring their own tangible person- show the importance of paying serious attention to alities. Their very presence in artistic life has changed the body’s role in enhancing knowledge, improving us: “The Western world is not only richer for pre- performance, and increasing the pleasures of living. It serving Sophocles’ Antigone or Beethoven’s Ninth considers the body as our primary means of engaging Symphony, but different” (p. 33). Even in our fragile with the world, including structuring of our mental times, classical music still has a healing power we ur- life, and is intended to fill a gap in the philosophical gently invoke in days of communal sorrow—witness and practical understanding of the body’s role in ex- the surge of commemorative concerts and specially perience, including the making and experiencing of commissioned works after September 11, 2001. the arts. It feels wrong to pick apart Kramer’s ecstasy. Pars- Perhaps it is useful to think of Shusterman’s philo- ing music’s exhilarating power to make the world sophical reflections on the body as a venture parallel meaningful is a monumental task, undertaken here to the efforts of contemporary artists to better un- with care and passion. Kramer is a master of docu- derstand and celebrate the human body and to use menting cultural practice, and that is the joy of this lit- it as a means of improved self-understanding in the tle book. And many observations ring so true: “Part changing world of today. Or perhaps his theoretical of the problem with the culture of classical music work on the body will serve as a bridge between the is that it receives all this with too much solemnity. work of the artists and philosophical aesthetics. Of It stifles its own energy with too much ceremony” course, readers will find a much broader scope than (p. 74). Certainly book reviewers can be guilty of this aesthetics covered in this book: issues in philosophy as well. of mind, insightful critique of major philosophers’ views on the body, and an approach to philosophy JENNIFER JUDKINS that embraces both theory and practical life. Herb Alpert School of Music On the technical front, Shusterman distinguishes UCLA three aspects of his subject: analytic somaesthetics, pragmatic somaesthetics, and practical somaesthet- ics. Analytic somaesthetics offers a descriptive and shusterman, richard. Body Consciousness: A Phi- theoretical account intended to explain our “bod- losophy of Mindfulness and Somaesthetics.Cam- ily perceptions and practices and their functions bridge University Press, 2008, ix + 227 pp., $85.00 in our knowledge and construction of the world” cloth, $24.99 paper. (p. 23). Pragmatic somaesthetics provides for spe- cific methods of somatic improvement as developed Throughout the history of art from classical times to in body disciplines such as the Alexander Technique the present, visual artists including draftsmen and and Feldenkrais Method. Pragmatic somaesthetics is 420 The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism divided into representational somaesthetics, con- tense sensuous pleasures, Foucault limits the range of cerned with developing the exterior forms of the somatic pleasures and the scope of awareness avail- body, and experiential somaesthetics, focused on able though a fully developed understanding of the shaping inner experience. Practical somaesthetics, its body. third aspect, is concerned with the actual practice of In the chapter on Merleau-Ponty, Shusterman ac- one or another means of body training (pp. 26–29). knowledges his role as a champion of the place of In developing the arguments of the present work, the body in human experience. Yet he is troubled by Shusterman draws on his previous writings, as well Merleau-Ponty’s treatment of the body as a silent, as his own applied experience in Western and East- primordial consciousness and his unwillingness to ern body training. For example, his book Pragmatic acknowledge somatic perceptions at a higher level Aesthetics (Blackwell, 1992) “establishes the body’s of cognitive experience. For Merleau-Ponty, the pri- role in the creation and appreciation of the arts, in- mordial experience of the world consisting of un- cluding the art of self-styling” (p. xii). In Practicing reflective habits of the “lived body” resides below Philosophy: Pragmatism and the Philosophical Life the level of reflective consciousness. It nevertheless (Routledge, 1997) and in Performing Live (Cornell serves fundamental needs and is the foundation for University Press, 2000), he develops “the notion higher reflective activities taking place in the form of somaesthetics as a field of theory and practice” of images, symbols, or logical propositions. Shuster- (p. xii). man argues that Merleau-Ponty’s resistance to the While one finds in these earlier works the main contributions of reflective somatic awareness is due structure of somaesthetics, Body Consciousness of- in part to his overestimation of these unreflective fers a closer look at the subject in the context of the powers and his resistance to changes in basic experi- writings of major twentieth-century philosophers. It ence by introducing representational experiences not thus probes deeper into somaesthetics with a criti- originally present in primordial perceptions. While cal examination of select twentieth-century philoso- Shusterman finds much to admire in Merleau-Ponty’s phers whose writings address the role of the body in phenomenological analysis of the body and his recog- human experience. Chapters devoted to each of these nition that philosophy is a way of life, he criticizes his philosophers form the main structure of the book: failure to appreciate the use of practical somatic ac- Michel Foucault, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, Simone de tions to improve awareness of the real body. In con- Beauvoir, Ludwig Wittgenstein, William James, and trast to Merleau-Ponty’s emphasis on the primordial John Dewey. These philosophers were selected be- past in prereflective experience, Shusterman advo- cause of their interest, if flawed or deficient, in ad- cates striving for better future experiences through dressing some aspect of the soma problem. This ap- pragmatic practical efforts to advance body con- proach allows the reader to see how the respective sciousness. philosophers have dealt with the body and how their The chapter on Simone de Beauvoir’s contribu- views both lend support to and differ from Shuster- tions to somaesthetics deals mainly with its applica- man’s account of somaesthetics. tion to the social disempowerment of women and Shusterman’s critique of Foucault’s pragmatic so- the elderly. Shusterman finds in de Beauvoir’s treat- maesthetics is part of an effort to show that plea- ment of the body an ambiguity that prevents her from sure itself is not a trivial issue, but is an important embracing cultivation of somaesthetics as a way of part of aesthetic and ethical notions of care of the empowering women and the elderly. De Beauvoir self. This point is of particular importance to Shus- prefers social empowerment to bodily enhancement terman’s main argument in the book. He finds in Fou- as a means of liberating women and the elderly from cault a commitment to the somatic and aesthetic as the constraints of a male-dominated existence. In this principal elements in the art of living. For example, respect she finds an emphasis on cultivation of indi- Foucault examines the connections between bodily vidual bodies a distraction from the societal aims of disciplines and oppressive sociopolitical institutions. freeing women and the elderly from their respective As an antidote to repressive social institutions, he states of weakness. Shusterman brings a critical read- advocates alternative social practices, including con- ing and analysis of de Beauvoir’s views that shows re- sensual homosexual sadomasochism and the advo- spect and also suggests the need to reconsider some cacy of pleasure-producing drugs. Shusterman finds key points in her approach to feminist aesthetics and value in Foucault’s affirming the priority of pragmatic the elderly. somaesthetics, for example, his critique of somati- The chapter on Wittgenstein’s contributions to so- cally based social domination. Yet he finds Foucault’s maesthetics invites the reader to take a different particular choices of unconventional somaesthetic look at Wittgenstein’s thought. His philosophy is means focused on sexuality and drugs in conflict known for critiquing the view that bodily feelings with Foucault’s own professed aim of desexualizing have a central role in philosophical understanding bodily pleasures. By concentrating only on these in- of such concepts as aesthetic judgment and human Book Reviews 421 action. Yet Shusterman argues, contrary to conven- interactions and organization requiring the use of tional readings of Wittgenstein, that notwithstanding symbols, including languages, the sciences, and the his critique of bodily sensations, Wittgenstein never- arts. Hence Dewey’s theory of mind extends through theless acknowledges the role of somaesthetic feel- the body into culture. Borrowing from Alexander, ings in aesthetics and other fields, including ethics, Dewey also holds that cultivating self-conscious so- politics, and philosophy of mind. Shusterman finds matic habits is essential to the promotion of human in Wittgenstein’s writings support for his views on growth and happiness. philosophy as working for self-improvement through The views advanced in Shusterman’s somaesthet- self-knowledge. Expanding on Wittgenstein’s treat- ics would find favor among biologists such as C. Jud- ment of the role of the feelings aroused by art, Shus- son Herrick (The Evolution of Human Nature [Uni- terman argues that, since aesthetic perceptions are versity of Texas Press, 1956]). As a biologist, Herrick achieved through bodily perceptions, our apprecia- prefers to think of mind as a particular kind of pro- tion of art might be sharpened through greater at- cess of performance of the body: “Mind is the body tention to the somaesthetic feelings involved in per- in action.” Contrary to philosophers inclined toward ceiving art (p. 125). idealism, who prefer to think of the mind as the pri- It is in the last two chapters, focused on William mary defining feature of persons, he would be quick James and John Dewey, that Shusterman finds the to point out that mind does not exist independently strongest philosophical affirmations in support of of the body. his own pragmatist views of the body’s central im- How is this discussion of body related to aesthet- portance. James’s interest in the body stems in part ics? Arguably, the body is the very foundation that from his experiences as a painter, alongside his bet- makes possible the creation of the arts, as well as the ter known interests in medicine, scientific psychol- articulation of philosophical reflections on the arts. ogy, and philosophy. James’s role as a painter drew Among the processes that artists draw upon to cre- his attention to “bodily form and subtleties of ex- ate, and those used by others to interpret art, are the pression” (p. 136). In James, one finds recognition of somatically grounded verbal, visual, auditory, and ki- the body’s role in providing for change and unity in netic means that emerge as creative expression in the stream of consciousness and also of the cognitive the arts. It follows that aestheticians stand to benefit role of bodily feelings, which are central to Shuster- from consideration of the body’s role in the arts as man’s views. However, James stops short of linking a resource for working on the problems of creating the will to bodily activities, perhaps to avoid com- and interpreting art. promising his belief in free will. Shusterman finds Perhaps an example focusing on the art of dance James’s attempts to distance the will from the actions would be useful to show how somaesthetics might of the body inconsistent with his views supporting contribute to understanding. When a person thinks of the bodily means underlying other cognitive activi- the body in reference to aesthetics, apart from its rep- ties (p. 156). On the other hand, he acknowledges resentation in visual arts and sculptures, what comes James’s ability to describe in great detail his own to mind is the fine art of dance. For the performer, inner feelings as a notable contribution to somaes- whose preparation typically includes in-depth train- thetic introspection. This is so even though James ing in using the body to create and express feeling may have doubted the importance of introspection and meaning, knowledge of the body experience is for enhancing practical life actions outside the frame crucial to achieving a satisfactory performance ex- of his theoretical research. perience, both for the dancer and for the viewers. Dewey’s philosophy of body-mind embraces the At the center of dance for the spectator is the mov- idea that the body is an organ of the mind or transcen- ing body. To experience a dance, the audience mem- dent soul and functions as a grounding for both men- ber relies on, among other factors, information sup- tal and spiritual life. He acknowledges the influences plied by his or her own body as it interacts with of James’s Psychology, but he differs from James in the kinesthetic signals given off by the body of the acknowledging that the will, as well as other aspects dancer. of cognitive life, is connected to the body. Dewey The readers of Body Consciousness will benefit also extends knowledge based on somaesthetic in- from the clear and well-argued position of the au- trospection to practical life as well as to theory. In thor and will find much of relevance to contemporary this respect he acknowledges the influence of F. M. aesthetics and art theory. Unlike most books written Alexander’s method of body training in practice and by philosophers today, this book is intended to offer in theory. Dewey thus rejects dualism of mind and practical benefits aimed at heightened living to those body in favor of the view that mind is a function willing to heed its message. Yet the theory and critical of body. However, Dewey also recognizes the social analysis offered do not suffer from acknowledgment dimension of human development that depends on of its practical applications. In this respect the 422 The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism outcome fulfills the aim of philosophy as a way of Prosaics, in contrast, examines “aesthetic activity, life. events and artifacts in daily life” (p. 51). Because Mandoki conceives daily life as more or less coexten- CURTIS L. CARTER sive with social life, a robust prosaic theory requires Department of Philosophy a semio-aesthetics, that is, a theory of the social sig- Marquette University nificance of the aesthetic dimensions of daily life. International Curator, Beijing Museum of Mandoki’s theoretical commitments fully emerge in Contemporary Art Chapter 14, where it finally becomes clear that her version of prosaics is an extension of semiotics. It is as if her real goal is to work out, in detail, the mandoki, katya. Everyday Aesthetics: Prosaics, the full implications of Charles Sanders Peirce’s unde- Play of Culture and Social Identities. Burlington, veloped ideas about aesthetics. Mandoki proposes VT: Ashgate, 2007, xvii + 327 pp., $99.95 cloth. that socio-aesthetic analysis must attend to both the rhetorical and dramatic axes of daily life. Because saito, yuriko. Everyday Aesthetics. Oxford Univer- both of these axes have four manifestations along sity Press, 2007, xiii + 273 pp., $49.50 cloth. two further dimensions, the aesthetics of everyday life betrays an extraordinary symbolic density, for al- It is no coincidence that two monographs entitled most every sphere of daily life is organized in terms Everyday Aesthetics have appeared within months of of sixteen basic semiotic categories. each other. Katya Mandoki and Yuriko Saito have The book’s third and final phase corresponds to already established themselves in this emerging sub- the eight chapters of Part 6. Here, Mandoki identi- discipline of aesthetics. Their common ground is the fies fifteen socio-aesthetic “matrixes” or anthropo- thesis that theories developed to handle the fine morphic orders. She proposes that each is coherently arts have limited relevance for anything else. Now organized around one dominant symbol, which plays we have their extended thoughts on how aesthetics out in all sixteen of the basic semiotic categories. might eschew art-centered theories in order to en- Thus religion, for instance, is aesthetically very dif- compass all of our aesthetic experiences. (To be ac- ferent from the world of medicine. She devotes in- curate, Mandoki is returning to the topic of her 1994 dependent chapters to six of these matrixes, offering book, Prosaica: introduccionalaest´ etica´ de lo cotid- detailed analyses of the complex symbolic displays of iano [Grijalbo].) Of the two, Saito’s book is likely to religion, family, school, medicine, occultism, and the have the greater influence, in part because her ambi- artworld. tions are more modest and thus more fully realized. My general summary of the book barely hints at Mandoki’s Everyday Aesthetics: Prosaics, the Play the contents of these three hundred dense, dense of Culture and Social Identities has a Byzantine orga- pages. Approaching the halfway mark, Mandoki re- nization, with thirty-two chapters grouped in six sec- quests the reader’s patience (p. 135). Distinctions are tions. Her argument is best understood as proceeding made, subdivided, and then cross-referenced against in three stages. other distinctions, as when her sixteen basic semiotic The first stage corresponds to Mandoki’s Part 1, categories are revealed to be forty-eight categories by “The Labyrinths of Aesthetics.” These four chap- virtue of a more fine-grained analysis (p. 166). Read- ters are offered as a summary and then rejection of ers who wonder about the efficacy of this approach “mainstream aesthetic theory” (p. 43). One’s likely might skip Chapters 11 through 24 and proceed di- response to her analysis can be estimated by one’s rectly to the theory’s applications in Part 6. response to this sentence: “Aestheticians continue to I have reservations about each stage of Mandoki’s work alone in the museums, libraries and art galleries central argument. The first stage, the attack on main- with their coffee table books and academic journals stream aesthetics, proceeds on the assumption that so as not to be disturbed by the smell, heat, and sweat a Kantian, disinterested response to “aesthetic ob- of everyday life” (p. 13). Those who scoff at this sen- jects” is still the core topic of analytic aesthetics tence are likely to reject Mandoki’s analysis; those (p. 43). As a result, Part 1 is no more effective who nod their heads in agreement are likely to em- against contemporary aesthetics than are creationist brace it. attacks on evolutionary theory that argue that, be- Parts 2 through 5 constitute the second stage, in cause Darwin got some important points wrong, we which Mandoki offers a theoretical prosaics as her must give up evolutionary theory. Both aestheticians preferred alternative to recent analytic aesthetics. and biologists have moved on. “Prosaics” is, of course, opposed to “poetics.” The The second stage, which links semiotics with an latter emphasizes the construction and reception of account of the aesthetic dimensions of daily life, has objects that reflect an elitist, institutionalized art- a different problem. Mandoki’s argument appears to world: the mere “tip of the aesthetic iceberg” (p. 51). be that there is no perception without conceptual