Date: Thu, 13 Nov 1997 22:54:17 -0800 (PST) To: bhaskar-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU From: Ralph Dumain <rdumain-AT-igc.apc.org> Subject: BHA: ABSENCE & AESTHETICS As interesting as these interpretations of art works have been, it seems that they all hang on the vaguely defined notion of "absence". Aside from the naming of absence and absenting of absences as the essence of dialectics--a rather nebulous and poorly defended notion--I don't see much of Bhaskar's ontology imported into these discussions. One could use the word "absence" or simply "dialectics" or "negation" and then riff off of this basic notion, but such discussion hardly adds up to a structured or methodological discussion of aesthetic or cultural questions. So far absence has been tied to Bloch's idea of utopian hopes. At least this goes a little bit of the way toward defining what art does. I like to use C.L.R. James's notion of the dialectic between the actual and the potential. But without further specifying the way that art addresses "absences", I can't see much fecundity, let alone originality or profundity, in deploying the naked notion of "absence" as a way of seriously approaching artistic and cultural questions. Surely there's got to be more than this. --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005