Date: Tue, 25 Nov 1997 13:30:47 -0500 From: George Trail <gtrail-AT-UH.EDU> Subject: Re: PLC: RE: Art & Truth ilke and, it seems, all modern art is >conditioned by this ambivalence. I think that Hegel might have speculated >this >ambivalence of art if he had spent any time thinking about it -- but >instead, he >pushed on to religion, philosophy and science. > If art can transform, and I think it can and does, the 'whence and >whither' of >this transformation is not at all clear to me. Certainly when art and >truth had >a more stable, even Platonistic relation, this 'whence and whither' was easier >to express. > >Ciao, >Reg The Platonist is doomed always to a theory of art as imitation, in which it must needs be inferior to the "creation" it imitates (human nature, the eternal verities, whatever). If it is then realized that Platonism is a mysticism which depends on the posited One, glimpsable by the truly enlightened, it becomes religion, or worse perhaps, liberal pedagogy. If, on the other hand the message of philosophy (the only basis for art) is that language is inescapable, and that that language is "ours," strictly, and that from it emenate all values and orders, art, the creation of the real man, the imagination can save us. The tragedy is that it has not, but as I kept saying, there's no one to blame but us. Pax, g Px --- from list phillitcrit-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005