Meaning of Modern ArtNorthwestern University Press, 1968 - 166 sayfa That modern art is different from earlier art is so obvious as to be hardly worth mentioning. Yet there is little agreement as to the meaning or the importance of this difference. Indeed, contemporary aestheticians, especially, seem to feel that modern art does not depart in any essential way from the art of the past. One reason for this view is that, with the exception of Marxism, the leading philosophical schools today are ahistorical in orientation. This is as true of phenomenology and existentialism as it is of contemporary analytic philosophy. As a result there have been few attempts by philosophers to understand the meaning of the history of art—an understanding fundamental to any grasp of the difference between modern art and its predecessors. Art expresses an ideal image of man, and an essential part of understanding the meaning of a work of art is understanding this image. When the ideal image changes, art, too, must change. It is thus possible to look at the emergence of modern art as a function of the disintegration of the Platonic-Christian conception of man. The artist no longer has an obvious, generally accepted route to follow. One sign of this is that there is no one style today comparable to Romanesque, Gothic, Renaissance, or Baroque. This lack of direction has given the artist a new freedom. Today there is a great variety of answers to the question, "What is art?" Such variety, however, betrays an uncertainty about the meaning of art. An uneasiness about the meaning of art has led modern artists to enter into dialogue with art historians, psychologists and philosophers. Perhaps this interpretation can contribute to that dialogue. |
Diğer baskılar - Tümünü görüntüle
Sık kullanılan terimler ve kelime öbekleri
abstract abstract art absurd aesthetic appears attempt bad faith Baumgarten beauty become boredom called Canaday cliché conception confront created creation demands deny Der Blaue Reiter desire discover distance divine dream English park escape expression feel finite foundation Franz Marc freedom Freud Friedrich Schlegel fundamental Gislebertus give Hans Sedlmayr Hazel E Herbert Read human Ibid idea ideal image illusion imitate individual infinite interesting interpretation Kandinsky Kierkegaard Kitsch Klee Kunst lack landscape Leibniz longer look Malevich man's Marc meaning medieval Middelharnis modern art modern artist nature negate nothingness Novalis object painter painting Phenomenology Picasso Plato point of view possess possible present presupposes realism reality reason recognize reveal Sartre Schopenhauer Sedlmayr seems sense sensuous situation slime slimy speak spectator spirit spontaneity sublime suggests suprematism symbols taste things tion traditional trans transcendence transformed truth unconscious understanding veil Walter Hess Worringer York
Popüler pasajlar
Sayfa 4 - ... go back to the Reason-Principles from which Nature itself derives, and, furthermore, that much of their work is all their own; they are holders of beauty and add where nature is lacking. Thus Pheidias wrought the Zeus upon no model among things of sense but by apprehending what form Zeus must take if he chose to become manifest to sight.
Sayfa 5 - Our interpretation is that the Soul — by the very truth of its nature, by its affiliation to the noblest Existents in the hierarchy of Being — when it sees anything of that kin, or any trace of that kinship, thrills with an immediate delight, takes its own to itself, and thus stirs anew to the sense of its nature and of all its affinity.
Sayfa 5 - But what must we do? How lies the path? How come to vision of the inaccessible Beauty, dwelling as if in consecrated precincts, apart from the common ways where all may see, even the profane?