steepholm

I think in most intentionally artistic enterprise the one obviously affects the other but it is interesting to consider if your response would differ if you were ignorant of the context and intent or if the the two are actually indivisible. What is aesthetically beautiful is also to some degree culturally determined so it is probably impossible to lose the impact of context altogether. However, I still think that it is a useful distinction with that rider - I think you can appreciate that something is well shot and composed, cut, edited and organised and has a kind of integrity. The degree to which these things are used to further a rhetorical purpose is a separate issue I think. I agree that in this case the definition of beauty is defined by ideology but it is possible to appreciate what something looks like, the artifice necessary to achieve it as well as appeciating how effectively both serve a particular purpose and acknowledging that achievement may also be morally repugnant; I do think those as distinct ways of apprehending an artistic endeavour.