1
24
A Description and Example of Leo Tolstoy's Aesthetics
through the Art of Diego Rivera
by Amanda Schenley
Leo Tolstoy is known to most people as a classic
novelist and essayist. However, in addition to those
written works he was also a philosopher. In his book,
“What is Art?” Tolstoy sought out a subject that reflected
directly back to him and his creations: the definition of
what makes a work a work of art. This paper will give a
brief timeline of other major philosophers’ beliefs on
aesthetics to provide context and a starting point for
Tolstoy. After the history, this paper will detail Tolstoy’s
views on aesthetics, identifying and discarding what is
and is not relevant to art’s definition. Finally, the paper
will exemplify Tolstoy’s vision of art through Mexican artist
Diego Rivera. His pieces on the Mexican Revolution and
the Workers’ Movement demonstrate the connection
between the artist and the spectator that Tolstoy exalts.
For Tolstoy, art is not found in the definition of beauty
or the reference of taste or the production of pleasure. In
his book “What is Art?,” Tolstoy describes what he believes
art’s main purpose is; why the artist plays a significant
role in its production, and how he comes to define what
art is. Tolstoy says that it is about humanity and emotion
and the transmission of that emotion to other men. It is
about unifying them in similar feelings for their progress.
Tolstoy understands and expands on the discrepancy of
the definition of beauty even though he doesn’t believe it is
a deciding factor as to what art is. Tolstoy spends an
entire chapter detailing the opinions of his predecessors
and contemporaries on what beauty is.
According to the founder of aesthetics, Baumgarten,
beauty is a correspondence of the parts of “The Perfect.”
They are recognition through the senses, reason, and
moral will. He says that beauty is to excite and cause
2
25
Janua Sophia
desire. Baumgarten also thinks that nature is the highest
embodiment of beauty, so therefore the primary goal of art
is to copy nature. The next set of philosophers (i.e.
Mendelssohn, Sulzer, Moritz) claim otherwise of beauty’s
importance. They think that goodness or morality should
take its place in Baumgarten’s theory. After these
philosophers comes a different school of thought;
Winckelmann leads the way saying that the aim of art is
beauty only, separate of goodness and that antique art is
the only art that can get to the highest form of beauty.
Therefore, all modern art should mimic antique art if it
hopes to be beautiful as well. Many German philosophers
through Goethe believed this until Kant’s appearance.
Philosophers from other European countries follow similar
paths almost simultaneously with the Germans. Kant says
that beauty, without reasoning or practicality, is pleasing
and that it is perceived without an idea of use or utility; a
sort of disinterested pleasure. One sees it and they are
delighted; however, one does not feel a desire to have it.
After Kant, the thoughts of some people changed to
exclude beauty from the actual world, and they said that it
was a concept of the soul. Others continue to expound on
similar theories until Hegel, where the doctrine seems to
sit satisfied for a while. Hegel is seemingly less clear on
his theories, but more in-depth and metaphysical. This
only confounds the situation more and adds to Leo
Tolstoy’s argument about the exclusion of beauty from
art’s definition. Tolstoy notes these different ideas as to
what beauty is, to show that since there is no clear
definition and no way to determine a satisfactory one
(aside from the very basic disinterested pleasure that he
settles upon) because of its abstract nature, it cannot be
what defines art. We cannot assign a definition to one
3
26
Leo Tolstoy's Aesthetics
thing using a term that we cannot also define.
Tolstoy also dismisses the use of taste to define what
good art is. Taste is described as one man’s capacity to be
pleased or displeased by the aesthetics of a work of art. He
says this cannot be the “final arbiter of what good and bad
art” is, or that it is a reference we can use to even question
if production, display, and appreciation of art are
important (Tolstoy 5). For example, if food quality were
judged solely on taste, the best foods would be the ones
with the greatest flavor. However, this does not take into
account the effects on health, harmful or enriching, so
Tolstoy concludes that taste can not be the judge of art
either.
Tolstoy lists many schools of thoughts, ideas on beauty
and its progression through time. He then explains that
beauty can not be what defines good art. He also opines as
to why taste is not a good measure either. However, he
does not stop there. He renounces most other major
theories; for example, that art is a metaphysical
manifestation of God, or a game in which a person can
release excess energy. Tolstoy denounces the idea that art
may be an expression of man’s emotions through external
signs, the production of pleasure, and that art is pleasure
itself.
There are three other definitions of art in his book
“What is Art?” in which Tolstoy takes time to detail the
inexactness. The first is that art is present in the animal
kingdom. It is said to come from “sexual desire and the
propensity to play” (Tolstoy 48). He describes that this
propensity is coupled with “pleasurable excitement of the
nervous system” (Tolstoy 48). Tolstoy resists this theory by
saying that it is inexact because it does not describe
artistic activity, but the origin of art. It does not speak to
4
27
Janua Sophia
what art really is, only from where it came. Tolstoy also
addresses the nervous system’s response, saying that
other non-artistic things, such as pleasing smells, have
the same effect. Therefore, this definition is, one,
concerning itself with the wrong matters, and two, vague.
As Tolstoy continues, he dismisses the notion that art
is the external manifestation by means of lines, colors,
movements, sounds, or words, or emotions felt by man”
(Tolstoy 48). This is similar to Tolstoy’s theory; however,
Tolstoy simply states that the definition is lacking his
main condition: that the emotions of the artist take effect
on another individual and reappear within the sentiments
of the second man.
In the third and final theory, Tolstoy rejects that art is:
the production of some permanent object or passing action,
which is fitted, not only to supply an active enjoyment to
the producer, but to convey a pleasurable impression to a
number of spectators or listeners, quite apart from any
personal advantage to be derived from it. (49)
Basically, this theory states that everyone gets enjoyment
out of the artistic display. Tolstoy denies this because of
things aside from art, for example, magic tricks or a
gymnastic display also fit this description. Furthermore,
Tolstoy writes that other emotions are included in the art
gamut besides pleasing ones. The artist can feel and share
the sentiment of grief or distress and they can still be
forms of art. Tolstoy characterizes all these definitions of
art as “inexact” and he says that they all speak to the
pleasures art can give rather than to its most important
function - its service to humanity and life (49).
This paper gives example after example of why beauty
is sufficiently indefinable; taste is not a proper judge of
5
28
Leo Tolstoy's Aesthetics
what we can not define art with, and other fallacies about
the nature of art to show how Tolstoy’s argument stands
up against his predecessors and to show the flaws Tolstoy
has found in their theories. The detailed account of his
adversaries, contemporaries, and influences better
illustrates the difference between Tolstoy and everyone
else and also gives a much clearer idea of what Tolstoy
wrote, and thought, about art.
What Tolstoy does say is that we can define art by its
activity. Tolstoy says that art’s main responsibility or
principle function is to cycle feelings or sentiments of
inspiration through one man and to the next. He states in
an excerpt from his book, “The activity of art is based on
the fact that a man receiving through his sense of hearing
or sight another man’s expression of feeling, is capable of
experiencing the emotion which moved the man who
expressed it” (Tolstoy 180). It isn’t in the pleasing pictorial
representation for Tolstoy, it is the artist feeling joy or
sorrow or courage or any other notion, and his ability to
pass on the exact thing he felt and for the receiver to
accept and share the sentiment.
There are certain stipulations to this interpretation,
however. Tolstoy says that the feelings don’t have to be
strong, good, or important. The transmitted feeling can fit
into any range, insignificant to necessary, weak to
powerful, evil to pure. The art’s quality does, however,
improve based on the strength of the transmission, or
infection, as Tolstoy puts it. He goes on to discuss three
more stipulations, and the degree of infectiousness.
Tolstoy says that the feeling must be individual, clear, and
sincere. The greater the three characteristics are, the
higher the degree of infectiousness.
Individuality speaks to the state of the soul. Tolstoy
6
29
Janua Sophia
says that the more individual the feeling a piece of artwork
generates, the more fiercely it acts on the viewer. So, if the
artist feeds a more individual feeling, the viewer is more
nourished or satisfied, and more intently is he pleased
and does he react to the pleasure.
Clarity is important to really reach the recipient of the
feelings. There is greater satisfaction in being able to see
or hear someone express perfectly, feelings one has had
throughout their life, but had always been unable to
adequately transmit.
Finally, sincerity is an artist’s most important asset.
Tolstoy says that when a receiver feels that the artist is
also greatly affected and infected by his own work, and
creates his pieces for himself, not for an audience, that it
makes for the greatest infection in the receiver. The
opposite is true when the audience sense that the artist is
being fake or producing the art for the recipient, the
audience is immediately repulsed. The artist needs to be
fueled by an inner need to express his emotions. Tolstoy
says that the three conditions of good art are all
interconnected.
So, first the artist feels the need to express himself and
he does so with sincerity. Every man is different, so all
people will experience the art and the feeling with their
own individual perspective. Obviously, the more individual
the artist’s feeling is, the deeper he has searched within
himself to find it. Thus, he is creating with even greater
sincerity. In coordination with that thought, the idea that
the deeper the artist searches within himself for
individuality, he will also find clearness. The sincerity of
the artist will compel him to find a sufficient clarity as
well.
Interestingly, Tolstoy asserts that upper-class art is
7
30
Leo Tolstoy's Aesthetics
devoid of the all-important sincerity and that it is riddled
with vanity and avarice. The only art always adhering to
the three conditions is peasant art, and it is the divine art,
according to Tolstoy. He states that if an artwork lacks
even one of these conditions, it is labeled counterfeit.
Since all three are so interconnected, they are all essential
in determining a work’s worth. Tolstoy also makes clear
that all these conditions are apart from the subject matter,
that they are not affected by whether a feeling transmitted
is good or bad. They only concern themselves with the
presence of a feeling at all.
Tolstoy addresses the question of the importance of
infecting more than one person. He talks about the
exponential increase of excellence in a work according to
its infection of one man, but he goes on to say that the
infection of more people is important. Tolstoy asserts that
good art pleases everyone. For obvious reasons this
statement can not be entirely true. No piece of art is going
to please every person, but Tolstoy’s point is that the more
people an artist can reach through his work, the greater
the art’s worth.
In this paper Tolstoy’s theory will be exemplified,
especially in accordance with the idea that more people’s
infection further validates the work, using a famous
painter and his arts’ influence on many people. It will be
illustrated that this painter's artwork infected many
citizens, not only of his country, but others in a time of
need, too. This paper will explain how Diego Rivera helped
propel and support the social reconstruction after the
Mexican Revolution and Mexican progression during his
life and post mortem.
In many books on the Mexican Revolution and the art
of its era, muralist Diego Rivera is portrayed as an
8
31
Janua Sophia
overzealous yet inactive supporter of the revolution. He
makes clear his beliefs as a liberal and a communist, but
is chastised for his choice to remain in Europe during the
actual revolts. However, when the First World War broke
out 1941, Emiliano Zapata, a major force in the Mexican
Revolution, was calling for all Mexicans to return to their
home country. Rivera obliged, feeling patriotism, and
excited by the revolutions, but not without the influence of
his Russian friends in a similar situation. During his trip
home, Diego focused on joining activists groups in support
of the revolution. He became a member of the
Revolutionary Union of Technical Workers, Painters, and
Sculptors and the Mexican Communist Party. Criticisms
of Rivera extended to those unions, where at one point he
was rejected from both (Diegorivera.com). The Mexican
Communist Party cast him off because of his too radical
ideas, attacks on the church, and relation with Trotskyism
(Wikipedia.org). In the Technical Workers’ union, artists
like David Alfaro Siqueiros and José Clemente Orozco, two
other very important Mexican muralists, implemented a
set of rules guiding what type of art the members were to
create.
Like Tolstoy, Rivera subscribed to the idea that art
should be public. Rivera also took seriously the idea of
promoting and glorifying Mexican history. This is seen
repeatedly in his works about Mexican workers and
murals like The Arsenal. Rivera did not, however, follow
the idea that people should “reject art of good taste,” that
it is produced for the market or political spectators,
academic art, or intellectualized criticism (Goldman xxi).
This caused him to be expelled from the circle of his artist
contemporaries.
Tolstoy places art’s greatest importance on man’s
9
32
Leo Tolstoy's Aesthetics
transmission of his feelings. In Rivera’s painting The
Agitator it seems unmistakable, not only how he feels, but
how he came to feel that way. He was affected by the
Russian Revolution and it appeared in this work when he
signed his name with the sickle and hammer. Although it
was inspired by the Russian Revolution, his use of
Mexican landscape and vegetation makes it easy to realize
how he felt about the situation in his homeland. Also, the
Mexican plant, as trite as it sounds, is stuck between a
rock and a hard place, seemingly indicating a tough
situation. This was an allusion to the revolution in his
country and the dire problems found within. Also, it is a
foreshadow of what was to come, even if Mexico were to
realize its goals, it would still be forced to start over as a
country and into a rebuilding period. Rivera undoubtedly
echoed the sentiments of his Russian comrades during
their revolution, as do Mexican citizens of Rivera’s
feelings.
In The Arsenal, Rivera recreates the tenacity and
determination of the revolutionaries. It depicts artist Frida
Khalo handing out guns to show the figurative and literal
force needed to obtain their rights as citizens and workers.
Organizations like the Confederation of Mexican Workers
fought politically to get unions. Others, like Confederación
General de Obreros y Campesinos de México (or CGOCM),
rallied for workers’ strikes and against employers’ strikes.
Also, they mobilized when the leftist president Lázaro
Cárdena feared a coup by a former president.
Because of the influence Rivera’s work had on people
and the murals he was painting at home, many other
countries commissioned him to paint murals on their
important buildings. The Ministry of Culture, on behalf of
the Red Army Club, hired him to paint a mural in Moscow
10
33
Janua Sophia
(Diegorivera.com). Later, despite his discomfort with North
Americans, or “gringos,” he accepted a job in San
Francisco to paint a mural for the Stock Exchange.
Shortly after, he painted one for the California School of
Fine arts (PBS.org). It was of him and his team in motion,
painting their feelings. Right in the middle of the work was
Rivera’s buttocks. This was to symbolize their hard work.
His art became a huge success in America and he was
commissioned in other cities, including New York and
Detroit . He was accepted until he crossed a line during a
commission work in New York City . Despite differences
and the destruction of the work commissioned by The
Rockefellers, he continued to paint his revolutionary and
communist feelings (PBS.org).
Although he had an influence on movements in his
country, his greatest influence was on Frida Kahlo, his
second wife. She had been an avid follower of his before
they met. He recreated his feelings on the revolution and
Mexico ’s sad state in her. She joined his cause and
supported him throughout his life. Not only was she
influenced by his political ideals, but she felt the pride he
felt and conveyed in his paintings. She was also a painter,
and his feelings about painting in general were transferred
to her through their relationship and her admiration of his
works. Rivera also painted individual workers picking
flowers, toiling with large baskets strapped to their backs,
struggling to make a living. These feelings still resound in
the Mexican community today.
Though Diego Rivera was not always in great standing
with his contemporaries, his art did impact the history of
Mexico and the world. Today his presence is still felt as
are his sentiments about Mexican workers. He painted all
types of workers engrossed in their jobs, and for the
11
34
Leo Tolstoy's Aesthetics
workers of Mexico it was a way for them to have their
feelings heard through a louder voice than their own.
Mexican establishments today still line the walls of their
businesses with reproductions of Rivera’s workers.
In conclusion, this paper argues that Tolstoy would
consider the works of Diego Rivera “good art.” Rivera's art
fits all of Tolstoy's criteria--the intentional transmission of
clear, sincere feelings, individuality, and peasant art. Also,
Rivera reached people on a massive scale through the
Workers’ Movements and progressivism after the Mexican
Revolution as well as a very singular, personal scale as he
did with his greatest admirer, Frida Kahlo. Today Rivera
continues to touch both ends of the spectrum, large
groups and individuals, through his pieces concerning
Mexican workers.
Works Cited
“Diego Rivera.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diego_Rivera
“Diego Rivera.” http://www.diegorivera.com/bio/index.
html
“Diego Rivera.” http://www.pbs.org/wnet/
americanmasters/database/rivera_d.html
Goldman, Shifa M. Contemporary Mexican Painting in a
Time of Change. Albuquerque, NM: University of New
Mexico Press, 1977.
Ross, Stephen David. Art and Its Significance: An
Anthology of Aesthetic Theory. New York, NY: State
University of New York Press, 1987.
Tolstoy, Leo. What is Art? New York, NY: The Bobbs-Merrill
Company, 1960.