A psychosomatic condition asserts that our responses to things are a matter of personal taste, and therefore under our ‘mental control.’ This proves exactly the opposite. We can’t help but respond positively to beauty.

Critical theory allows us to expand our definition of art, and we can have all kinds of responses to art, including being enraged or disgusted or shocked, but our response to beauty remains static. It affects us physically, and in a positive manner.

Possibly training can help bring about enjoyment of “unsightly” art but one would need to answer the burning question of why spend the time and effort on training someone to enjoy ugly art? Is it just an intellectual exercise?

The same goes for architecture, dance and fashion I assume. After all, a lot of modern architectural training is all about indoctrinating students in the economically feasible designs of the present (i.e. concrete, some more concrete, topped with a bit of what is essentially 3D cubist concrete). Music is probably far to primeval to be easily measured.

I don’t know about this individual personally. Any photos for this article which were not supplied by Touchstone Museum in Nelson, BC, or by John Cooper himself, I took myself (old digital camera + fluorescent flicker does not make for very sharply focused shots, I’m afraid.) Touchstone blew up images from some of Cooper’s old catalogues because there had been a fire in which many of his original works were destroyed, and that was the only record left of those works. Perhaps if you contact Touchstone, the curatorial department there can be of assistance.

Here is the link to their site:

http://www.nelsonmuseum.ca/

Good luck!