Paolo Euron Art, Beauty and Imitation An Outline of Aesthetics
Copyright MMIX ARACNE editrice S.r.l. www.aracneeditrice.it info@aracneeditrice.it via Raffaele Garofalo, 133 A/B 00173 Roma (06) 93781065 ISBN 978 88 548 xxxx x I diritti di traduzione, di memorizzazione elettronica, di riproduzione e di adattamento anche parziale, con qualsiasi mezzo, sono riservati per tutti i Paesi. Non sono assolutamente consentite le fotocopie senza il permesso scritto dell Editore. I edizione: giugno 2009
CONTENTS Preface... 7 CHAPTER 1 The beginning of western aesthetics. Art, imitation and beauty in Plato s philosophy... 11 CHAPTER 2 Art and imitation in Aristotle... 19 CHAPTER 3 Plotinus, neo-platonic and Christian conception of beauty... 25 CHAPTER 4 Baumgarten. Aesthetics and sensitivity... 31 CHAPTER 5 Kant and the origin of modern aesthetics... 37 CHAPTER 6 The heritage of Kantian philosophy in the Romanticism... 45 CHAPTER 7 Moritz. Beyond the concept of imitation... 51 CHAPTER 8 Aesthetics of German Early Romanticism... 57 5
CHAPTER 9 Hegel. Art as a form of absolute spirit... 67 CHAPTER 10 Schopenhauer. Art as disinterestedness and knowledge of reality... 75 CHAPTER 11 Nietzsche. Knowledge and work of art... 81 CHAPTER 12 Heidegger. Work of art and truth... 89 Bibliography... 101 6
PREFACE This book is intended as an introduction to philosophical aesthetics for readers who do not have a lot of experience and knowledge in philosophy. I have laid it out above all for students who are not from European culture, who will find in these pages a general and easy introduction to main topics of aesthetics and of western philosophy. The historical perspective presented by this work aims to give to the reader some basic philosophical issues and ideas which are a constitutive part of the contemporary conception of beauty, art and artwork. Our ideas about art and beauty (these are the general boundaries of aesthetics) are not only our individual and personal ideas, but they come from a millenarian tradition. The knowledge of the philosophers and of philosophical concepts of the past supply the student and the scholar with essential conceptual tools in order to understand his normal, everyday experience of beauty, work and art. The understanding of Plato s and Aristotle s ideas about art and beauty is necessary to understand our ideas about art and beauty, the relationship between beauty and truth and the relationship between artistic imitation and deception. The understanding of Heidegger s conception of work of art means to understand a current trend of contemporary art and the narrow relationship between avant-garde artists and philosophers in the last century. In general this book has a practical aim: the understanding of our concrete and common experience of works of art. Moreover this book deals with the origin of some philosophical questions, which the actual pieces of art work can raise: what does art have to do with truth? What does art have to do with moral? Is the work of art an imitation of reality? Can a work of art endanger our moral sense? It could be a pointless question to decide if Plato or Heidegger were right or wrong when they wrote about art and truth. For us it is 7
Paolo Euron important to find the philosophical categories and the conceptual tools in order to understand a problem, to set the problem in its right horizon and to consider it in the right perspective. We are no longer in Plato s or in Kant s age, but we owe Plato and Kant our philosophical categories and conceptual patterns, which we use when we speak of beauty and of art, even if we are not aware of it. This is not a general and complete survey of western aesthetics, but it shows a wide range of issues of aesthetical relevance, as they have presented themselves in the history of philosophy and in the development of western culture. The knowledge of the thought of great philosophers of the past is intended to develop the critical skills of the reader, so that they can understand questions regarding their actual experience of the works of art and the current trends of their culture. This is the practical purpose of this book. Each chapter is organized in short paragraphs. Starting from a general question, each paragraph presents the philosopher s thought about a specific issue. Some important texts (as brief as possible) will supply the reader with the real experience of philosophy, which is (besides the living dialogue) the reading of philosophical texts. In this book I will avoid any thorough analysis of a problem as well as any theoretical proposal. Such intensification of inquiry and study in depth of aesthetical problems will be the object of another book. In this one I prefer to offer suggestions and proposals in order to think of our real experience of philosophy in our everyday life (even when we are not aware that we are philosophizing) and to face our concrete experience of art and pieces of art work. At the beginning of each paragraph a question focuses the proposed problem in simple and clear terms. Art, beauty and imitation are leading treads that appear more or less central in a philosophers thought: developing of aesthetics is neither reflection on the same topic nor a different answer to the same question. At the end of each chapter one or two questions pose themes for reflection and discussion. It is not necessary (and sometimes not even possible) to find a right answer. In most cases the question is more important than every possible or definitive solution. Some chapters of more theoretical relevance are a little longer and with more philosophical contents. Chapters on Kant and on Heidegger present philosophical concepts more difficult for students. In any case, it is possible to set apart the most technical paragraphs (e. g. the one on imagination in Kant s philosophy) without problems for the general 8
Art, Beauty and Imitation. An Outline of Aesthetics understanding of the philosopher s thought on art. Many chapters presented in this book have been elaborated as lectures presented at the Chulalongkorn University of Bangkok in November-December 2008. Advice and suggestions from professors and students have been decisive to give the final and actual form to these texts. I would like to express my thanks to Prof. Dr. Nuangnoi Boonyanate, Ph. D. Tidawadee Skulpone and to all the staff of the Department of Philosophy of the Chulalongkorn University of Bangkok, Thailand. Paolo Euron Turin, spring 2009 9
1 THE BEGINNING OF WESTERN AESTHETICS. ART, IMITATION AND BEAUTY IN PLATO S PHILOSOPHY The concept of art in ancient culture Is the concept of art a universal concept? The first problem we face when we deal with art in classical culture is the concept of art. Not all people had the concepts of art and of works of art as we know them today. People of ancient Greece and of Rome had no definition for what we call art. Now we have a general idea of what a work of art is: everybody has the experience of a work of art such as a painting, a poem or a building, and everybody can recognize a work of art, when he sees it, even if he has no idea of what art is. In front of a painting, a poem or a building today considered as a work of art, an ancient Greek or a Roman could only see a painting, a poem or a building, i. e. the product of the activity of an artisan. In ancient Greece there were works of art, and there was even the experience of the work of art, but this experience was not related with categories such as beauty or aesthetic quality. The work of art was indeed the result of a technical activity and there was no common denominator among the different technical activities such as painting, building or playing music. Art was not the general way to make different works of art. The activity to produce works (now we say: of art ) was named techne. We could translate it with ability or cleverness to create useful things. The artist (named technites) was a craftsman or an artisan. The attempt to define a term such as beauty, perception or, later, truth as common to different works of art, is a modern endeavour. 11
Paolo Euron The concept of imitation is a first attempt to understand the relationship between a work of art (that is our modern definition) and reality. The natural answer to the question put by things as works of art is: the thing called work of art is an imitation of reality. The concept of work of art, considered as an imitation of reality, is a consequence of conception of reality. Plato s ontological criticism of art Can art endanger our knowledge of reality? It is known that Plato (c. 429-347 BC) condemns art in general. Following Plato s theory of forms, the essence of reality is an immaterial (i. e. spiritual), eternal, perfect, changeless and unique (i. e. single) form. Each object of the material world is a copy of an immaterial, eternal, perfect, unchangeable and unique form. The material reality is nothing but an imitation of the immaterial world of forms, a world which exists beyond the sky (hyperouranios). Forms are models or archetypes of material things. Material things are a copy of immaterial forms. Things we meet in our everyday experience are nothing but an imitation of the real and full reality of forms. The joiner, making a material table, looks at the eternal, perfect and immaterial form of table which is in the world beyond the sky with his mind s eye. What about the work of art? A work of art is an imitation of reality. The artist paints a table and makes a copy of a material table which is already a copy of the immaterial form. The work of art is a copy of a copy, it is two times further from reality, and is therefore a deception. Works of art deceive because artists are deceivers. An artist is not a philosopher and he does not have any knowledge of the things he imitates. The imitator is a long way off the truth and can do all things because he lightly touches on a small part of them and that part an image. For example: a painter will paint a cobbler, carpenter or any other artist, though he knows nothing of their arts; and, if he is a good artist, he may deceive children or simple persons, when he shows them his picture of a carpenter from a distance, and they will fancy that they are looking at a real carpenter. [Resp., X, 598] 12
Art, Beauty and Imitation. An Outline of Aesthetics Now, do you suppose, that if a person were able to make the original as well as the image, he would seriously devote himself to the image making branch? [...] The real artist, who knew what he was imitating, would be interested in realities and not in imitations. [Resp. X, 599] The imitative artist [...] will go on imitating without knowing what makes a thing good or bad. [...] He has no knowledge worth mentioning of what he imitates. Imitation is only a kind of play or sport. [Resp. X, 599] Art is a false knowledge of reality. An artist s imitation can deceive common people, not the philosopher, who knows the essence of reality or the real being of things. Plato s moral criticism of art Can art endanger our moral conduct? Plato s criticism regards the knowledge of the true being of things, and therefore it is said ontological. This ontological blame is not the only reason for distrusting works of art. Plato is known for his moral blame too. This blame is particularly against the tragedy and the poetical works. According to Plato s moral philosophy, man s right behaviour consists of following the reason: A wise and calm temperament [...] is not easy to imitate or to appreciate when imitated [...] so the imitative poet, who aims to be popular, is not by nature made, nor is his art intended, to please or to affect the rational principle in the soul; but he will prefer the passionate and fitful temper, which is easily imitated. [Resp. X, 604-605] The poet concerns himself with the inferior part of the soul, not with the rational part, therefore we shall be right in refusing to admit him into a well-ordered State, because he awakens and nourishes and strengthens the feelings and impairs the reason. [Resp. X, 605] In his ontological and moral criticism of art Plato puts together two different activities that ancient Greeks could not find similar: poetry and figurative art. Plato is convinced that art (especially poetry) has a huge power on man s soul. Art can confuse the knowledge and the behaviour. Of course, 13
Paolo Euron we should remember that in ancient Greek society knowledge and wisdom were passed on from man to man by means of poetry. Now our knowledge is based on history, science or philosophy books; on encyclopaedias or from the internet. At the time of Homer knowledge as well as education were essentially based on oral tradition and poetry, recited by heart, was something like our encyclopaedia. History, geography, anthropology (all what concerns our moral sciences and much more) was handed on from teacher to pupil and transmitted by poetry. The education of ancient Greek [Paideia] was in large part based on oral tradition, as well as and philosophy. The first struggle of Plato was a struggle against ancient poets, who wanted to have the exclusive right of knowledge and of wisdom. We should also remember that in ancient Greece the concept of imitation [mimesis] was different from ours. Imitation was the action of the actor, who imitates feelings on the stage. Today we would translate mimesis (in its old and original meaning) rather as expression or acting or imitation of feelings than as just imitation. This meaning remains partially in Plato s conception of art, giving rise to his moral blame. Indeed in such a perspective imitation has a moral content (since imitation is a way to do and to feel) and it is the imitation of behaviour, with consequences on the behaviour of other people. There is a type of artist, who aims to be popular, who is dangerous for the people and so for a well ordered State. Can we share Plato s advice today? Actually, if we consider our mass-art, we realize that in a lot of music videos and TV entertainment, as well as in advertising or in popular movies, we often watch representations of extreme feelings: anger, passion, love, hate... and, often, these extreme feelings do not have any real purpose. According to Plato s thought, it is easier to represent an extreme character than a well balanced one. Beside this, music videos and advertising have to convince the audience, they have to sell something, and therefore they have to be effective. They do not have to induce the use of reason. In Plato there is another kind of imitation too: the imitation of forms. In the dialogue Timeus Plato tells a myth, in which the Demiurge (the maker or artisan ) makes the world. The Demiurge looks at the eternal and perfect forms, orders the shapeless matter following them as models and thus he makes everything necessarily beautiful. This is a slightly different meaning of imitation, mixed with the previous one, but it is enough to say that Plato is not against art as production in 14
Art, Beauty and Imitation. An Outline of Aesthetics general. In the myth of Demiurge, Plato indeed connects the imitation (of forms) not with deception, but with beauty. Beauty and art Is beauty different from knowledge? At the time of Plato there was not any connection among the different forms of art (music, dance, poetry, painting...) and there was not any connection between art and beauty. Beauty was only occasionally or by chance related to art. Beauty was a metaphysical topic: it concerned the theory of the being in its general form. As we have seen, the Demiurge ordered the material world according to the world of forms, making it necessarily beautiful: beauty of material reality is a consequence of its similarity with the being (forms) and not a consequence of art. If we ask to Plato: what is beauty? He would answer: forms are beautiful, the perfect being is beautiful, and among these forms, the form of good is the most beautiful. In Plato s philosophy beauty has to do neither with art nor with nature. For Plato beauty is the object of love [Eros]. Eros is a spirit or daemon between gods and men. Philosophy is nothing but the result of the force of Eros, the desire to get what we do not have. Eros is a force which compels us in search of the beauty and the good. In such a perspective beauty is the shining or the brightness of forms which we recognize in the material reality. The beauty of the human body is the expression of divine beauty of forms [Phaedrus, 250-251] and love for beauty is the first stage to get the wisdom of philosophy. This is the concept of beauty as brightness or brilliance. Such a conception of beauty is the oldest one and the most natural. Beauty as bright and light is indeed the concept of beauty as an immediate, sensitive and visual experience. In the archaic period beautiful was used only for the description of the human body. Then, later, the concept of beauty was extended to other visible objects, then to things in general, except for the immaterial ones. Homer, for example, could not say a beautiful voice. Nevertheless, the concept of beauty, first used for the description of physical beauty, was later used in a moral meaning too. The poet Sappho was perhaps the first one to propose the devaluation of the physical beauty of body in favour of the inner beauty of soul. 15