>Date: Tue, 23 Jul 1996 16:03:53 +1200
>To: heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>From: paul.murphy@xxxxxxxxxxx (Paul Murphy)
>Subject: Re: Art & Metaphysic
> But we residents of the so-called global village hardly comprehend pre-Thales Dasein, and cannot
>comprehend it if Heid's history of Being is right. That is, we are metaphysically oriented
>('destined') from the start, a situation culminating in the anthropocentrism endemic to liberatory
>enlightenment.
>
> on the poet vs. the statesman: >And this, the Ideal is the really real, is a cardinal Romantic
> >thesis, no?
> Though Heidegger emphatically spurns the claim that poets trade in the Ideal; the 'transcendence'
>specific to artworks is not that they epiphanically grant access to the heaven of eternal ideas,
>but rather that they hold open possibilities of encounter across time, enabling future 'preservers'
>to attend to the truth disclosed (or, better, truth as disclosure) in the work.
Not so much for me, across time, as if communicating with other, rather with time, with themselves
as historically thrown beings.
If you take my take of Gadamer's take of Heidegger's take on the work of art, then art can be seen
as a fusion of and thus revelation of: of one's selfhood/worldhood via one's thrown past AND one's
future intentions, desires, mastery (if one reads authenticity as self-mastery etc).
Further, via G on MH again, art is the fusion of institution and individual thinking, for it is only
via one's questioning of tradition that there even IS a tradition. (Refer also to S Kierkegaard on
genuine Christianity and questioning).
Art feeds on the meeting of the individual coming to terms with the Institution; it is the
revelation of the battle field between earth and sky, sorry, I'm rambling, I'll shut up.
Erik Champion
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>To: heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>From: paul.murphy@xxxxxxxxxxx (Paul Murphy)
>Subject: Re: Art & Metaphysic
> But we residents of the so-called global village hardly comprehend pre-Thales Dasein, and cannot
>comprehend it if Heid's history of Being is right. That is, we are metaphysically oriented
>('destined') from the start, a situation culminating in the anthropocentrism endemic to liberatory
>enlightenment.
>
> on the poet vs. the statesman: >And this, the Ideal is the really real, is a cardinal Romantic
> >thesis, no?
> Though Heidegger emphatically spurns the claim that poets trade in the Ideal; the 'transcendence'
>specific to artworks is not that they epiphanically grant access to the heaven of eternal ideas,
>but rather that they hold open possibilities of encounter across time, enabling future 'preservers'
>to attend to the truth disclosed (or, better, truth as disclosure) in the work.
Not so much for me, across time, as if communicating with other, rather with time, with themselves
as historically thrown beings.
If you take my take of Gadamer's take of Heidegger's take on the work of art, then art can be seen
as a fusion of and thus revelation of: of one's selfhood/worldhood via one's thrown past AND one's
future intentions, desires, mastery (if one reads authenticity as self-mastery etc).
Further, via G on MH again, art is the fusion of institution and individual thinking, for it is only
via one's questioning of tradition that there even IS a tradition. (Refer also to S Kierkegaard on
genuine Christianity and questioning).
Art feeds on the meeting of the individual coming to terms with the Institution; it is the
revelation of the battle field between earth and sky, sorry, I'm rambling, I'll shut up.
Erik Champion
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---