ABSTRACT
The expression “atmosphere” is not foreign to aesthetic discourse. On the contrary, it occurs frequently, almost of necessity in speeches at the opening of exhibitions, in art catalogues, and in eulogies in the form of references to the powerful atmosphere of a work, to atmospheric effect, or a rather atmospheric mode of presentation. One has the impression that “atmosphere” is meant to indicate something indeterminate, difficult to express, even if it is only in order to hide the speaker’s own speechlessness. It is almost like Adorno’s “more,” which also points in evocative fashion to something beyond rational explanation and with an emphasis which suggests that only there is the essential, the aesthetically relevant to be found. This use of the word “atmosphere” in aesthetic texts, oscillating between
embarrassment and emphasis, corresponds to its use in political discourse. Here too everything apparently depends on the atmosphere in which something occurs and where the improvement of the political atmosphere is the most important thing. On the other hand, the report that negotiations took place “in a good atmosphere” or led to an improvement in the atmosphere is only the euphemistic version of the fact that nothing resulted from a meeting. This vague use of the expression atmosphere in aesthetic and political discourse derives from a use in everyday speech which is in many respects much more exact. Here the expression “atmospheric” is applied to persons, spaces, and to nature. Thus one speaks of the serene atmosphere of a spring morning or the homely atmosphere of a garden. On entering a room one can feel oneself enveloped by a friendly atmosphere or caught up in a tense atmosphere. We can say of a person that s/he radiates an atmosphere which implies respect, of a man or a woman that an erotic atmosphere surrounds them. Here too atmosphere indicates something that is in a certain sense indeterminate, diffuse but precisely not indeterminate in relation to its character. On the contrary, we have at our disposal a rich vocabulary with which to characterize atmospheres, that is, serene, melancholic, oppressive, uplifting, commanding, inviting, erotic, etc. Atmospheres are indeterminate, above all as regards their ontological status. We are not sure whether we should
attribute them to the objects or environments from which they proceed or to the subjects who experience them. We are also unsure where they are. They seem to fill the space with a certain tone of feeling like a haze. The frequent, rather embarrassed use of the expression atmosphere in aes-
thetic discourse leads one to conclude that it refers to something which is aesthetically relevant but whose elaboration and articulation remains to be worked out. As my introductory remarks suggest, the introduction of “atmosphere” as a concept into aesthetics should link up with the everyday distinctions between atmospheres of different character. Atmosphere can only become a concept, however, if we succeed in accounting for the peculiar intermediary status of atmospheres between subject and object.
