Art and Morality

Abstract

OFTEN PERPLEXED by the nature of some sweet vision that has been given to critics and aestheticians who uphold a necessary bond between art and morality, we have tried to outline the connections that do in fact obtain.1 To accomplish this purpose the paper is studded with examples-the facts of the case most of which are obvious in their context, and all of which may be supported by further argument. For tlhe sake of brevity arguments as to the placing of this and that example are usually deleted; the examples are very largely left to their own defense. MIorality and art are connected at many levels and in many ways. The most obvious connection is found in those works of art tlhat present a code of action or a way of life. This sort of connection is found in allegory. A religious allegory such as Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress is a prime example. Camus' La Peste is less codified but still allegorical. Other works are full of purpose and persuasion though devoid of allegory. An example is Tolstoy's portrayal of Levin's life in Anna Karenina. All these wvorks present and commend to us an account of the good life for man. The opposite turn also has its play. Here we find morality set in negative terms; in effect each artist condemns. Camus provides another example, as we can directly oppose the positive doctrine of La Peste