| Sorted by date | |||
page053from Building Ideassenses and the empirical philosophies of Locke, Berkeley and Hume. Before approaching this debate and its consequences for aesthetics, another figure must be considered as an early contributor to this field.
The Roman philosopher Plotinus, who lived in the third century AD, managed to resolve some the contradictions between the two philosophies set out above. In developing a complete system from Plato’s fragmented dialogues, he produced an influential aesthetic theory as a component of his neo-Platonism. Beginning with Plato’s divine creator as the ultimate source of truth and beauty, Plotinus set up a hierarchical system to explain the relationship between different levels of being. These levels are described as emanations from the “One” – the “Absolute” source of the order of the world. From the One comes the divine mind, which Plotinus called Nous, and from this comes the Soul, both of the world and of individuals. The Soul, as for Plato, controls or pilots the body, which is part of the final emanation into the physical world of objects. All levels partake of the divine order of the One, and it is this order that the Soul comes to recognize in its contemplation of beauty. Individual beauty is therefore a symbol of an underlying cosmic harmony, which the Soul can perceive because of its relationship with the One. This higher form of beauty is what the individual soul aspires to, and the artist therefore has this goal in mind. In nature this beauty is only imperfectly represented whereas the artist can discover it more directly from within. It is here that Plotinus parts company with Plato’s thinking, as the artist is given a privileged role in his system: Still the arts are not to be slighted on the ground that they create by imitation of natural objects; for, to begin with, these natural objects are themselves imitations; then, we must recognize that they give no bare reproduction of the thing seen but go back to the Reason-Principles [Ideas] from which nature itself derives, and furthermore, that much of their work is all their own; they are holders of beauty and add where nature is lacking.4 4 Plotinus, Enneads, translated by Stephen MacKenna, Penguin Books, London, 1991, V, viii, 1 , 411.
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
page052from Building IdeasPoetics he set out a lot of practical advice, covering the construction of plots and dramatic characters for the theatre. Throughout he is concerned with this potential to educate an audience through the actions of the performers dealing with moral dilemmas. The experience of catharsis – the emotional release of shared experience – is described as a major effect of tragic drama in the theatre. It is this ability of the audience to empathise with the characters’ emotions that becomes the standard for all art, whether musical or visual. This notion that art offers a heightening of experience became a powerful force in later thinking on aesthetics. As Aristotle writes in the The Poetics, it allows an approach to the universal beyond that provided by the “imperfect” individual:
As tragedy is an imitation of personages better than the ordinary man, we should follow the example of good portrait-painters, who reproduce the distinctive features of a man, and at the same time, without losing the likeness, make him handsomer than he is.3 When Aristotle writes of beauty in the more abstract sense, he cites order and harmony as its fundamental components. Like Plato, he looks to nature for examples of these qualities, but he concentrates on physical causes rather than metaphysical models. He proposed an inner force to explain the functioning of living organisms, as well as the cause-and-effect principle, which would influence later thinking in science. Where Plato tried to show the emergence of the particular from the universal, Aristotle reversed this movement with his normative ideals. Similarly, in Plato, the artist seems trapped by the universals and restricted to the imitation of the forms found in nature. In Aristotle, however, the individual has some freedom to discover, like the scientist, new ideals in the world. The opposition set up here between the two views of the artist became part of a dichotomy between two systems of thought. From Plato’s idealism and the dominance of the intellect came the Rationalist tradition of Descartes, Hegel and others. On the other hand, from Aristotle came an emphasis on the 3 Aristotle, The Poetics, translated by I. Bywater, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1984, 1454b, p 2327.
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
page051from Building IdeasAnd for everything – for every sort of instrument, living being, or act – doesn’t the question “Is it good, beautiful, or right?” come down to the use it is made for or naturally has?2
In the culture of Plato’s Greece this appreciation of organic form also inspired an artistic naturalism, particularly in the depiction of the human figure in painting and sculpture. The attempt to express the underlying perfection of the “universal” beneath the “particular” betrays the desire to improve on the “imperfect” versions of the ideal that nature produces. However, all this is directed towards the knowledge of the ideal forms, which only the intellect can ultimately apprehend, concealed as they are beneath the surface of the sensible world. Thus, art in Plato’s system is merely the means to an intellectual end, which the philosopher must dispense with in the process of the search for truth. The ambiguity of the role of art as an improvement of imperfect nature is addressed by Aristotle, Plato’s pupil and successor. In the Platonic system nature provides and “image” of the underlying forms whereas art, as an image of nature, is even further removed from truth. Aristotle’s philosophy ends up reversing this arrangement, suggesting that art can, by perfecting nature, lead us closer to the truth. For Aristotle reality lies not in the realm of being – Plato’s timeless realm of forms – but in the empirical reality of experience, of sensible objects which grow and decay. By starting with the objects of sensory experience he developed an alternative brand of “normative” idealism. His definition of “universals” was based on the averaging of “particulars”: by studying numerous individuals one could define the nature of the “ideal”. This study numerous individuals one could define the nature of the “ideal”. This study of the particular that Aristotle recommends becomes important also for his philosophy of art. Though he wrote mostly of literature, including poetry and drama, he recommends the arts as a source of practical knowledge in the way that Plato never did. Where Plato talked of abstract notions such as goodness and truth, Aristotle is concerned with practical issues of emotion and behavior. In The 2 Plato, The Republic, translated by I. A. Richards, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1966, Book X(601), p 178.
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
page050from Building Ideasmusical harmony is something only the reasoning mind can eventually come to appreciate. The goal for philosophy, according to Plato, was to see beyond all earthly distractions, to leave behind the realm of the senses and to contemplate the unchanging universals. In Book VII of The Republic, in the allegory of the cave, Plato constructs an elaborate illustration of this intellectual journey of the philosopher, from the “shadow world” of appearances to the reality and light of true knowledge. Like Hegel’s later idealism which builds on similar philosophical assumptions, Plato also has little time for the contribution of the individual artist. He would, as he describes in the final book of The Republic, have banished all poets from his ideal well-ordered society, ruled as it was by an enlightened dictatorship of educated “philosopher-kings”. The underlying principles of order and mathematical harmony are the ingredients of Plato’s ultimately moralistic brand of aesthetics, which he goes on to describe as part of an ideal educational system: And isn’t it necessary for the young to be influenced by these qualities everywhere, if they are to do what is truly theirs to do? And these qualities may be seen in everything, in painting, and in ornament, in the making of everything, clothes, buildings, pots … and in the forms of living things. In all these, order or good form and its opposite have their places. Things without order, rhythm and harmony go with ill words and ill feelings but good order goes with courage and self-control.1 While Plato is willing to connect beauty to the moral sense of the true and the good – as though the cultivation of good taste would ensure and individual’s good behavior – it is the beauty found in nature more than the work of the mere artist which is the source for this experience and sets the standards of “good design”. Usefulness is one factor significant to this quality, which leads to an almost functionalist principle of design:
1 Plato, The Republic, translated by I.A. Richards, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1966, Book III(401), p57.
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|||
Messagefrom General Critics"this view of the architect as intuitive artist"
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
The newest updates:
At 2021-11-02 20:28:57,
page000
Paula Noronen
Yökoulun Pieni Kauhukäsikirja
kuvitus
Kati Närhi
Tammi
... ...
At 2021-09-28 09:43:54,
page0013
Ruoka
Kakkua pullaa, leipää ja
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:05:39,
page0012
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:04:58,
page0011
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:04:35,
page0010
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:04:02,
page0009
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:03:17,
page0008
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:02:35,
page0007
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:02:14,
page0006
... ...
At 2021-09-27 15:01:32,
page0005
... ...
At 2021-09-27 14:59:22,
page0000
... ...
At 2021-09-27 14:58:31,
page0000
... ...
At 2021-09-27 14:57:52,
page0000
... ...
At 2021-09-27 14:57:21,
page0000
... ...
At 2021-09-27 14:56:34,
page0000
... ...
Share to International sites:
分享到国内网站和微博
