#philippineaesthetics

In today's world, art has evolved. Every nation and tribes have their own signature style that when you see an art, you will be like "Oh! That's from *toot* back in *toot*" or maybe "ooohhh.. I haven't heard that before, but I think it's from *toot*." The texture, technique, material, instruments, etc. could determine the origin of an art. By 'art', we have songs, poems, dances, paintings, sculptures, and a lot more which an individual expresses herself/himself. BUT! It does not just define one's self, hence, it defines and reflects the society where and when the artist/creator belong. According to Alice Guillermo, "Art is socially and historically situated and is shaped by the materialconditions of society." And here's where aesthetics come into the picture for it is the philosophy of art. Guillermo defined aesthetics as "[a branch of philosophy that] has something to do with conserns of content, as well as of form, with the nature of art and its place vis-a-vis society."

The real condition of Philippine culture was revealed in the text-and that condition is cultural identity crisis. The reason why we - Filipinos, have an unstable cultural identity is because of our history of colonization. This crisis is the one that our Filipino artists are striving to resolve and give justice. The foundation of our culture identity is weak - as well as the foundation of the Filipino language. If our Filipino artists' and scholars' goal is to eradicate culture alienation from its own, then why don't they just focus on developing it - making works that truly defines the Philippines, instead of making accounts that states the problem of Philippine culture vis-a-vis its society. In the sense, it does not help, and it's just making things complicated in the idea that it does not end the problem - just acknowledging it. Anyone who would be reading this kind of texts may be inspired and may decide to write something that also involves Filipino culture alienation. It will just go round and round not resolving the problem at all.

With the realization, in contrary with the latter, that Guillermo's text, Philippine Contemporary Aesthetics is also an art - in correspondence with our society. She wrote in the third premise given that:

"aesthetics itself, like art, is socially and historically situated and shaped by the social conditions of a particular time and place. This implies that aesthetics is not universal nor true for all men and for all time, and neither should there be a dominant aesthetics that imposes its standards on different cultures, but it differs from one place and time to another, from one culture to another."

Therefore, the account is not making anything worse, hence, it is the reflection of the status quo of Filipino culture, in the span of its evolution through history. Aesthetics is not something that has an imposition of a constant standard which will dictate if an art is beautiful and creative or not. With whatever condition a place may have at a certain time, and an art was made in reflection to its status qou, it is an art - a genius' art. Thus, she further explained, "Only a process of reeducation will from centuries of miseducation will heal this alienation from our deepest sources."

Also, with regards to the idea that artists should be the one to preserve Filipino cultural signature would be a bit restricting to some. For they will be locked up with following the patterns available in Filipino art ONLY. This approach of preservation is condemning the growth of our Filipino artists, Guillermo explained.

Furthermore, Guillermo created an art that corresponded with the modern problem of Filipino culture. She created it with aesthetics.