Philosophical Aspects of Literary Objectiveness
ABSTRACT: Gadamer’s hermeneutic philosophy avoids the problem of literary objectiveness altogether. His approach witnesses the general fact that an indifference towards literary objectiveness in particular, leads to a peculiar neglect of par excellence literariness as such. It seems obvious, however, that the constitutive aspects of the crisis of literary objectiveness cannot be shown to contain the underlying intention of bringing about this situation. At this point, one can identify what could probably be the most important element in a definition of literary objectiveness. In contrast to ‘natural’ objectiveness and objectiveness based on various societal conventions, the legitimacy of a literary work is solely guaranteed by its elements being organized in accordance with the rules of literary objectiveness. Thus when the crisis of literary objectiveness intensifies, literariness will also find itself in a crisis. This crisis detaches new, quasi-literary formations from various definitions of literariness. When literary objectiveness ceases, however, to be understood as a system constituted by various objective formations aiming to correspond in one way or another to the ‘world’, scientific analysis of literary objectiveness will be rendered impossible. The crisis of literary objectiveness thus brings about the crisis of the theory of literature and the philosophy of art. Gadamer explicitly argues that the scientific approach proves to be inadequate in the analysis of artistic experience. This attitude results in the categorical rejection of a scientific orientation (and so in a complete indifference towards literary objectiveness), but he seems to overemphasize an otherwise correct thesis on the non-reflexive character of artistic experience. It is the anti-mimetic and Platonic character of Gadamer’s aesthetic hermeneutics that determines the status of literary (artistic) objectiveness in his system of thought. What is of crucial importance, however, is to point out that this aesthetics entails a fundamental reduction of the significance of literary objectiveness. As soon as the essence of aesthetic object-constitution is taken to be re-cognition (plus the emanating aesthetic possibilities), the absolutely natural interest in the original object represented by a work of art.Undoubtedly, Gadamer’s conception answers a number of questions that tend to be ignored by other theories. It is just as obvious, however, that Gadamer completes here the aesthetic devaluation of the objective domain. It is not the characteristics of the ‘original’ that constitute the image, but in effect the image turns the original into an original. Paraphrasing this claim one arrives at a near paradox: not objectiveness makes a work of art possible, but a work of art lends objects their objectiveness.
...critics eyes as it looks at a piece of work and where the eyes follow. Also that the space and time for the LC system, the function is only a basic framework and the division of visual arts are a medium in fundamental antiquarian. Robert’s defense is Arnaldo Momigliano perspective upon early-modern antiquarian to modern historian which is most historian would write in chorological order while antiquaries write in a systematic way. The other perspective is Historian find facts to discover and explanation in multiple ways and an antiquarian examines a research relations connected to the exact subject (The Map of Art History, 32). Overall Robert’s essay was really persuasive to me and it provide enough strong evidence where it convince me to agree with the idea of having art history and disciplines also societies to represents itself through order and classification.
In Gaut’s essay, “The Ethical Criticism of Art”, he addresses the relevance of an art piece’s ethical value when making an aesthetic evaluation. His key argument revolves around the attitudes that works of art manifest such that he presents the following summary “If a work manifests ethically reprehensible attitudes, it is to that extent aesthetically defective, and if a work manifests ethically commendable attitudes, it is to that extent aesthetically meritorious”. In direct contrast with formalists, who divine a work’s merit through an assessment of its style and compositional aspects, Gaut states that any art piece’s value requires a pro tanto judgement. This pro tanto position allows for pieces considered stylistic masterpieces, to be
ABSTRACT: British Avant-Garde art, poses a challenge to traditional aesthetic analysis. This paper will argue that such art is best understood in terms of Wittgenstein¡¦s concept of "seeing-as," and will point out that the artists often use this concept in describing their work. This is significant in that if we are to understand art in terms of cultural practice, then we must actually look at the practice. We will discuss initiatives such as the work of Damien Hirst, most famous for his animals in formaldehyde series, and that of Simon Patterson, who warps diagrams, e.g., replacing the names of stops on London Underground maps with those of philosophers. Cornelia Parker¡¦s idea that visual appeal is not the most important thing, but rather that the questions that are set up in an attempt to create an "almost invisible" art are what are central, will also be discussed. Also, if we concur with Danto¡¦s claims that "contemporary art no longer allows itself to be represented by master narratives," that Nothing is ruled out.", then it is indeed fruitful to understand art in terms of seeing-as. For application of this concept to art explains what occurs conceptually when the viewer shifts from identifying a work, as an art object, and then as not an art object, and explains why nothing is ruled out.
The ‘unintelligible’ works of artists such as Marcel Duchamp, Arnold Schoenberg or Paul Celan have prompted him to wonder how can such art “exert a claim upon us as powerful and as authorative as that of the classical or traditional works” In The Relevance of the Beautiful he says that the arrival of enigmatic art forms, such as abstract and conceptual art, atonal music and hermetic poetry has been a “genuine revolution.” The insisting presence of such works of art has inspired him to ask “how it comes about that the work addresses us.” Gadamer’s hermeneutic is concerned primarily with what it means to understand something whether it is another human being, an artwork or a natural phenomenon. Whereas the unintelligibility of so much of modern art has challenged the validity of the all encompassing hermeneutic understanding he has envisioned, the hold these art forms exerted on viewers have convinced him that they are indeed a communicative event of sorts. Moreover, their unintelligibility does not negate his notion that works of art are indeed a hermeneutic phenomenon. In a genuine, attentive, encounter with art, he suggests, something happens to the perceiver. The object of art addresses the world in its absolute ‘otherness’. It is an authentic event despite being
Deep-seated in these practices is added universal investigative and enquiring of acquainted conflicts between philosophy and the art of speaking and/or effective writing. Most often we see the figurative and rhetorical elements of a text as purely complementary and marginal to the basic reasoning of its debate, closer exploration often exposes that metaphor and rhetoric play an important role in the readers understanding of a piece of literary art. Usually the figural and metaphorical foundations strongly back or it can destabilize the reasoning of the texts. Deconstruction however does not indicate that all works are meaningless, but rather that they are spilling over with numerous and sometimes contradictory meanings. Derrida, having his roots in philosophy brings up the question, “what is the meaning of the meaning?”
What are Literary lenses? The term acts a figure of speech. The lenses are used to view a piece of literature from different angles in order to find multiple themes. This has been a relatively new expression in the last few decades as literary lenses have grown to be taught in high schools and colleges throughout the United States and the world. Since the terms creation in the late 20th century, students now learn many of these lenses in school to analyze pieces of literature. The lenses can help a reader understand why something happened, or where it is taking place. They can help to bring discriminatory things to light and cast them aside to better appreciate the work. In the University of Minnesota’s College in the Schools Literature class
The attempt to set up a standard for assessing the merit of works of art, based upon contingent connections between these works and the sentiments (feelings of pleasure or displeasure) of spectators, was famously made by David Hume. His attempt remains the locus classicus for those philosophers who attempt to found the aesthetic judgment upon empirical, rather than a priori, grounds. I have myself given it a limited defense (1). Recently, Hume's argument has been severely attacked by Malcolm Budd (2). His central contention is that Hume completely fails to introduce any normative element into the aesthetic judgment; he fails, that is, to give any content to the claim that some judgments on the value of a work are more warranted or appropriate than others...
The “hermeneutic activity –the practice of close reading” (373) is what Love evaluates next. The practice of close reading became the framework of hermeneutics in the early 20th century and has been the foundation of text evaluation since then, no matter what different literary approaches and cultural changes were present, since “the richness of texts continues to serve as a carrier for an allegedly superannuated humanism”(373). Her own assertion regarding the interpretation of texts can be interpreted in sev...
The notion of the author has often been disputed when it comes to critical literary studies. The argument centers around one basic question: Should the author be considered when looking at a text? There are numerous reasons given as to why the author is important or why the ...
In The Landscape of History, John Lewis Gaddis makes a cohesive argument concerning about the debate over the objectivity of truth by stating “objectivity as a consequence is hardly possible, and that there is, therefore, no such thing as truth (Gaddis 29). The question for objective history has long been debated by numerous historians, and the differing viewpoints of history have led to a transition in our ways of thinking in the modern world. Ultimately, the question that this paper focuses on is: to what extent is history objective? Along with this, the relation to historical consciousness and the challenges of living in modernity will also be assessed. This paper will analyze the texts of John Lewis Gaddis, Nietzsche and the Birth of Tragedy, Modernity and Historical Vision, Living in Modernity, and Hermeneutics. Finally, the paper will argue that history is not largely objective, and is fundamentally shaped through the historian’s subjectivity.
Roald Barthes’s 1967 critical essay “The Death of the Author” addresses the influence of the author in reading and in analyzing his or her writing, the power of the reader, and the option to ignore the work’s background and focus solely on the work. When critically looking at writing, the author is forced to take sole responsibility for the work. Whether the audience loves or hates, whether critics think it is genius or failure. With this idea the creator’s work has a direct correlation to the creator himself or herself, which according to Barthes seems to take away from the text. In other words, the information not stated within the work defines the work. The historical and biographical elements culminate into a limitation of interpreting the text. Barthes goes on to discuss the text itself appearing as derivative, saying that all texts from a certain era will be read the same due to the cultivation of a culture. The direct intent of the author may be muddled due to the translation from author to text to reader, with the text becoming more of a dictionary than anything else. This point ultimately leads to Barthes’s main point: the reader holds more responsibility to the text than does the author. The complexity of different experiences that come from the author into the text is flattened when it is read. The reader comes blindly and has no personal connection to the text. So much information is condensed and made inaccessible to the viewer. Barthes makes the point that a work may begin with the author, but its last stop is with the reader.
Philosophies of Art and Beauty Edited by Hofstadter and Kuhns, (Chicago: University of Chicago press, 1976) chapters one and two for an overview of the aesthetics of Plato and Aristotle.
Stone, W. F. (1897). Questions on the philosophy of art;. London: Printed by William Clowes and Sons.
The concept of ‘the Death of the Author’ was proposed by, French philosopher and literary theorist, Roland Barthes in his essay with the same title. He proposed a paradigm shift in the way that authorship should be viewed by the ‘Critic’. In opposition to the classical model of critique, Barthes proposed that the focus should be on the readers experience and interpretation; he proposed the idea of ‘readerly’ and ‘writerly’ texts. Rather than focusing on the author’s intent, his or her past building up to the text and the singularity of his or her intent, he suggested that once a text has been committed to written words it transcends into a ‘tissue of signs’ and ‘immense dictionary from which he [the writer] draws a writing that can know no halt’ [Barthes 1977, 147] and the only thing of importance to the critique of the work would be the experience of the reader. He proposed that ‘the work’ itself is merely a string of words that, without a reader, would be void of meaning. He also suggests that these two polar opposites were mutually exclusive of one another and that ‘the birth of the reader must be at the cost of the death of the Author’ [Barthes 1977, 148]. The discussion that follows will be based on Stephen Heath’s French-to-English translation of Barthes work from the compilation of essays, ‘Image – Music – Text’, translated and compiled in 1977 (three years before Roland Barthes’ death).
In A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man, Stephen Dedalus defines beauty and the artist's comprehension of his/her own art. Stephen uses his esthetic theory with theories borrowed from St. Thomas Aquinas and Plato. The discourse can be broken down into three main sections: 1) A definitions of beauty and art. 2) The apprehension and qualifications of beauty. 3) The artist's view of his/her own work. I will explain how the first two sections of his esthetic theory relate to Stephen. Furthermore, I will argue that in the last section, Joyce is speaking of Stephen Dedalus and A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man as his art.