Martin Weatherston:
"I think it is demonstrable that in "On the Origin of the Work of
"Art" Heidegger is trying to recapture the primordial, pre-metaphysical
"experience of art. Everything is expressed very much in the context of
"the "first beginning" and so it will inevitably appear naive to those
"schooled in the metaphysical subtleties of modern aesthetics.
Yes, but:
"Aletheia" is a core notion with H ontologically. He here
restricts its permissable meaning to the anthropologically primitive:
unmediated, forcefull, concrete, sensual presence (physis)...says that
the chronologically (is he denying time and history?) later concept of truth,
abstract truth, is really antagonistic to truth...requires, here instancing
the work of art (as it were intensified dasein), one suspend his critical
faculty,
and just let the "thing" be.
Wagner lovers insist one banish any thought of
matter and form and simply let the great waves of luscious sound
wash over him. Metaphysics and subtleties aside, I ask you, is
one experiencing the immediate unconcealed forceful presencing of being,
or, cheap sex, an archetypal erotic pattern? which is the truth?
And what of his instancing the Gk Temple? i.e. art previous to its
weaning from religion? Isn't this exemplum a disaster for
his thesis? In origin it is supremely utilitarian (equipmental):
a means of addressing/managing the cardinal practical problems
of human life...its beauty, "art"-ness, purely adventitous.
That is to say, its being qua work of art clearly originates
in the most elemental factical matrix. Oughtn't Occkam's razor
still be plied?
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
"I think it is demonstrable that in "On the Origin of the Work of
"Art" Heidegger is trying to recapture the primordial, pre-metaphysical
"experience of art. Everything is expressed very much in the context of
"the "first beginning" and so it will inevitably appear naive to those
"schooled in the metaphysical subtleties of modern aesthetics.
Yes, but:
"Aletheia" is a core notion with H ontologically. He here
restricts its permissable meaning to the anthropologically primitive:
unmediated, forcefull, concrete, sensual presence (physis)...says that
the chronologically (is he denying time and history?) later concept of truth,
abstract truth, is really antagonistic to truth...requires, here instancing
the work of art (as it were intensified dasein), one suspend his critical
faculty,
and just let the "thing" be.
Wagner lovers insist one banish any thought of
matter and form and simply let the great waves of luscious sound
wash over him. Metaphysics and subtleties aside, I ask you, is
one experiencing the immediate unconcealed forceful presencing of being,
or, cheap sex, an archetypal erotic pattern? which is the truth?
And what of his instancing the Gk Temple? i.e. art previous to its
weaning from religion? Isn't this exemplum a disaster for
his thesis? In origin it is supremely utilitarian (equipmental):
a means of addressing/managing the cardinal practical problems
of human life...its beauty, "art"-ness, purely adventitous.
That is to say, its being qua work of art clearly originates
in the most elemental factical matrix. Oughtn't Occkam's razor
still be plied?
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---