Reading Day 1
Aesthetic educationECF #essay, #aesthetics, #physicalculture, #democracy
Between 1917 and 1941 the Soviet government included physical culture as part of its revolutionary project to remake individuals and society (Hoffmann 3). Physical exercise and fitness were considered fundamental to the development of harmonious and complete individuals upon which a collective, socialist society could be built. From an anatomo-political perspective, this was a fruitful deal: a healthy population, reinvigorated by daily exercises, not only would be more prone to a continuous, efficient and aesthetic labor, but would represent an important resource in an age of large-scale industrial manufacturing and mass warfare (Hoffman, 4). Physical education was, therefore, systematically included in school programs and fitness was incentivized amongst the population, regardless of age and gender (Hoffman, 5). Aesthetics (and aesthetic education) played an important role in this story. The discipline of aesthetics studies the relational logics between beauty, virtue, taste, and knowledge. It designates certain kinds of objects, judgments, attitudes, experiences, and values, most often applied to the arts (Shelley). The productive approach of the discipline (poiesis) studies what constitutes the aesthetic object. It examines the role of the artist in the gestancy of the work of art, and questions the notions of creativity, imagi nation, and inspiration. The receptive approach (aisthesis—closer to its greek roots: aisthetikos (Online Etymology Dictionary)—analyzes the aesthetic experience. It focuses on the recipient of the experience (mostly, the viewer) and examines the nature of perception itself.
Both approaches are remarkably present in Soviet physical culture. One of the purposes of the Soviet government pursuing the physical instruction of bodies was to make them able to produce aesthetic labor. This aligns with the marxist idea of dismantling work alienation, according to which workers should receive the benefits of their own labor, as much as be able to enjoy voluntary, recreational, and fulfilling jobs. Hence, the aesthetic object of physical culture was harmony, and its methodology physical exercise. This form of labor, though apparently far from art, is not so distant from the ideals of beauty and virtue that prevailed during the middle ages, and which constituted for several centuries the object of aesthetics. It is also close to the notions of harmony and proportion that bloomed during the renaissance and which laid out the foundations of the modern discipline (Givone). There is, however, a notable exception: the responsibility of generating aesthetic objects was not reserved to artists or literates—anyone could achieve this objective with enough training. Therefore, the purpose of physical culture was no other than democratizing aesthetics. But exercise wasn’t enough by itself and to achieve the fulfillment of their ambitious project, soviet authorities required the support of mass media communication. To engage with their public, they produced posters and photographs that projected images of well-proportioned, vigorous, muscular bodies (Hoffman, 7), often accompanied by diverse body-machine hybridisations, in a call to a technology-led progress.
14
