 Attempts to demarcate the aesthetic via the identification of an aesthetic attitude, or of an aesthetic mode of attention, have been attacked — for their details, and for their more general orientation (most famously by George Dickie, in his 1964 paper). Those lines of attack have led to a widespread acceptance of the idea that there is something wrongheaded about specifying necessary and sufficient conditions for qualifying as aesthetic via the identification of some particular aesthetic attitude. Many philosophers nonetheless retain the idea that there are informative things that can be said, in the service of less strictly defined theoretical ends, about the sorts of attitudes that are often found to be exemplified in aesthetic cases. It is in this spirit that some ideas about distinctive forms of aesthetic attention have recently been revived.