Francis Hutcheson and the Problem of Conspicuous Consumption

Abstract

In the last three decades or so there has been a great deal of discussion about the origin of aesthetics as a philosophical discipline. Most contributors to the debate agree that the early eighteenth century is crucial. In Britain in this period the systematic philosophical engagement with art as we know it today emerged. The philosophical controversy has mainly been about which category or categories most adequately characterize the appearance of philosophy of art: Should we opt for disinterestedness, taste, attitude, beauty, or something completely different in our efforts to understand this development? In this essay I suggest a more wide-ranging, cultural historical or social historical framework wherein the emergence of aesthetics in the early eighteenth century can be understood, and on this basis I give an interpretation of aspects of Hutcheson's Inquiry into the Original of our Ideas of Beauty and Virtue.' Most interpretations of the emergence of aesthetics proceed from the assumption that the early theoreticians, such as Shaftesbury and Hutcheson, carved out an independent, specifically aesthetic realm for art, which could then become the domain of their theoretical efforts.2 The interpretation to follow shows that the opposite was the case: Hutcheson wanted (as did his predecessor Shaftesbury) to give moral legitimacy to the contemplation of art, a task that was forced upon him by the social and political circumstances of the early eighteenth century. Early contributions to the philosophy of art must be understood as part of a complex redrawing of social and cultural boundaries. The late seventeenth century into the early eighteenth century in Britain was a time of profound political, economic, religious, and cultural transformations. The cultural transformations are manifest in the emergence of an extensive periodical press, the rise of the novel as a literary genre, greater availability of theatrical and musical performances, an enlarged interest in painting, and the growing public criticism of artistic creations, as well as in the increased prestige of experimental and empirical approaches to many areas of inquiry.3 The period was also one of an increased preoccupation with dress and the moral consequences of fashion. Expanding imports as well as increased domestic production of textiles for the first time made it possible for a large number of people to have a choice in dress. Though many found this and similar developments morally and politically reprehensible, the economic significance of fashion and conspicuous consumption was quickly discovered by contemporary observers.4 Many of these developments reflect the fact that social status had become more ill-defined. The old communal view of the social order had gradually dissolved, and forms of accomplishment characteristic for those on top in this social order had lost much of their validity. Particularly the opening of the upper ranks of society to anyone with enough money, and the possibility of dressing and appearing as a gentleman (even if, strictly speaking, one wasn't) gave cause for concern. I can find no better way of characterizing these new social groups than the imprecise middle class, or what in the contemporary