In the field of environmental art, the concept of beauty is linked to the history of wilderness and Romantism.  The beautiful and the sublime arouse a debate that opposes the defenders of a pragmatic and materialistic commitment in favor of ecology against the partisans of a subjective and sensitive creation to the point of exacerbation. In reality, these debates are nothing but old quarrels over the engagement of art, the recognition or rejection of its autonomy towards other disciplines, especially regarding scientific expertise. Approaching creation from the angle of beauty is a way of updating our principles of taste, the ability to judge and also to raise once again what is considered a risk for the individual and for the collective, the exacerbation of the senses, the passions and seduction. But finally, and above all, it is about implementing a principle of utility for art that neglects all subjective creation at a time when collectively and daily we are subjected to a regime of guilt and anxiety which orchestrates in turn a form of political and existential resignation. But what remains of aesthetic and artistic experience in such conditions? Does not the rationality of this approach confuse art and communication, enabling it to subject creation to censorship?