The Misunderstanding of Art in Grendel

That is why, for Camus, an artist is a recreator of myth. He teaches humanity that contemporary man must abandon the old myths that have become otiose, though once defined his existence. The artist liberates man to live in his world by redefining both man and the condition in which he exists. In this regard, it is important to point out that, for Camus, the traditional opposition between art and philosophy is arbitrary. It is because they together become most effective to create the redefinition: the philosophy awakens the consciousness and the art, propelled by such a radical discovery, ... ... middle of paper ... ...ion could be taken both to find the guilty (those who send the plague and those who allowed it to arrive) and to prevent the same thing happening again.

I will be discussing the Novorealism movement. The idea to return to the sublime, beauty, and the humanistic ideal of honesty and seriousness in Art is what Novorealism entails. The notion of Novorealism is to get ride of irony in contemporary Art practices, and other negative and sarcastic effects that belittle Art. The founders of Novorealism have developed a manifesto, which I will be examining. Post-Modernist philosophies, as well as art theory and practices based on them, have lost their significance.

Therefore, the purpose of the artist should be to challenge how individuals perceive themselves and the offensive aspects of society reflected in art to bring about innovations in the greater society. Art is not useless as Oscar Wilde stated; nor is it the death of logic by emotion as Plato supposed. Art is an activist trying to inform and shape the social consciousness. Art by nature is critical and questions how the world is perceived. These questions are pivotal in creating change within society.

In undermining the artists authorial status, Michael Faucalt asks "what difference does it make who is speaking?" . The appropriation artists have challenged this notion of authorship with a range of techniques that affirmthe iimportance of artist as creator and author, dismantling the Modernists traditional notions and demands of complete originality. Instead, artists championed the idea that a work of art is ultimately the expression of the artists individuality and it is up to the artist to decide whether or not to include original sources. Originality should not be a constraint, it is society that directs pressure and demands originality, not the artists obligation.

Ed. G. Robert Carlsen, Ruth Christopher Carlsen, and et al. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 1979. 540.

Though pragmatic critics believe that art houses the potential for massive societal transformation, art is conspicuously ambivalent in its ability to promote good or evil. The critical project of pragmatic criticism is to establish a moral standard of quality for art. By establishing artistic boundaries based upon moral/ethical guidelines, art which enriches and entertains, inspires and instructs a reader with knowledge of truth and goodness will be preserved and celebrated, and art which does not will be judged inferior, cautioned against, and (if necessary) destroyed. Moral outrage as well as logical argument have been the motivating forces behind pragmatic criticism throughout history. The tension created between this emotional and intellectual reaction to literature has created a wealth of criticism with varying degrees of success.

To him restoration policy is a compromise, and we humans are not doing what we are attempting when we restore nature. Instead of restoration policy, a better policy would be to prevent the incidences the caused use to try to restore nature in the first place. If a preventative policy were advocated instead of one of restoration, nature would be free to develop by its self without the intervention of humans who restore nature in a way that serves their own purposes. Works Cited Katz, Eric. "The Big Lie: Human Restoration of Nature."

Lies are broadcast as truth, sexuality is repressed, and history... ... middle of paper ... ...t the author wants. If we simply accept things the way they are, they will inevitably get worse, so through literature Orwell and Atwood have created a call to action. Fictitious future societies such as Oceania and Gilead are two of the many dystopian societies that have been created to warn us against social and political ill will. Through numerous works, we are asked to take a step back and consider the world around us, and what we can do to protect and preserve, as well as fight and change. It encourages us to acknowledge the good in the world, but to also stay aware.

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. Much of contemporary art, as many have noted, has posed a challenge to much of traditional philosophical aesthetic analysis.

Narrativity, Modernity, and Tragedy: How Pragmatism Educates Humanity ABSTRACT: I argue that the modernist notion of a human self (or subject) cannot easily be post-modernistically rejected because the need to view an individual life as a unified 'narrative' with a beginning and an end (death) is a condition for asking humanly important questions about its meaningfulness (or meaninglessness). Such questions are central to philosophical anthropology. However, not only modern ways of making sense of life, such as linear narration in literature, but also premodern ones such as tragedy, ought to be taken seriously in reflecting on these questions. The tradition of pragmatism has tolerated this plurality of the frameworks in terms of which we can interpret or 'structure' the world and our lives as parts of it. It is argued that pragmatism is potentially able to accommodate both the plurality of such interpretive frameworks-premodern, modern, postmodern — and the need to evaluate those frameworks normatively.