ABSTRACT
The term “gnostic aesthetics” does not designate any cohesive research field or specific theory of aesthetic value or engagement. Rather it has been employed to designate approaches that diverge from dominant aesthetic categories and frameworks of experience or those understood to employ dualist frameworks. Similarly, no such category of “gnostic” visual art exists either: that moniker has been used to characterize artwork that either takes momentum or inspiration from discourses and traditions identified as “gnostic” and/or which consciously positions itself in a subversive or critical position in relation to dominant culture, materiality or “this world.” In the latter case, the use of “gnostic” or “gnosis” often operates as a synonym for deviant, secret, esoteric or hidden. The usage of the terminology in both cases is idiosyncratic. This brief discussion will present examples of such usage and interpretation.
