Friday, August 22, 2008

If artist works are a product of genius, as Kant described, then an artist is someone who has the subjective genius to transcend all time with their work of art. They push past all convention to the point that they break all established rules of composition with their genius. Geniuses present works of the imagination that 'prompts much thought, but to which no determinate thought whatsoever, i.e., no [determinate] concept, can be adequate, so that no language can express it completely and allow us to grasp it’ (CJ 314). Thus, the genius transcends our experience of the world with their imagination so much that their work stands the test of time. It has no meaning since it is beyond convention. Yet, I disagree wholeheartedly with this idea.

For me, art works are of cognitive import. They say something, and in the contemporary century, art objects critique the situatedness of their artists. While some works venture to explore, most contemporary artists of good repute use their art to critique, often producing visually disturbing shock value pieces. I know as a philosopher you would hope I am not guilty of assertion, but taking on Aristotelian mimesis from Gadamer without knowing arguments beyond a defense of hermeneutics is a gap that needs more justification. I think I will continue this post and add more to it a little later.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Bonjorno, philosophicalchasm.blogspot.com!
[url=http://viagracqui.pun.pl/ ]Acquistare viagra generico[/url] [url=http://cialisenta.pun.pl/ ]Comprare cialis online[/url] [url=http://viagrakhou.pun.pl/ ]Acquisto viagra online[/url] [url=http://cialisashy.pun.pl/ ]Acquisto cialis online[/url] [url=http://viagraater.pun.pl/ ]Comprare viagra in Italia[/url] [url=http://cialisuper.pun.pl/ ]Comprare cialis [/url]