Human being transcending itself: Creative process in art as a model of our relation to the ultimate reality

• Authors: Erich Mistrík
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The paper reviews some of the links between the notion of “ultimate reality” and everyday life, mainly art, beauty, the creative processes in art, and citizenship. If, according to M. Heidegger, art reveals the truth of being (i.e., also of ultimate reality), then we may find some historical descriptions of creative processes that are very close to descriptions of ultimate reality. Three examples of these kinds of descriptions are discussed (Abhinavagupta, St. Augustine, F. Engels). The final aim is to show how the interpretation of ultimate reality can contribute to a better understanding of the creative process in art. These considerations can also throw light on one particular aspect of civil life-the relations between everyday life and its final goals. If we are to gain an understanding of the relations between ultimate reality, art and civil life, then the disciplines of aesthetics, philosophy, history and anthropology, and cultural history should all contribute together.

Keywords

EN

ultimate reality; art; creative process; aesthetics; civil life

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Human Affairs
• Year: 2011
• Volume: 21
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 119-128

Dates

published

2011-06-01

online

2011-06-16

Contributors

author

Erich Mistrík

• Comenius University

References

• [1] Coomaraswami, A. K. (1956). The Transformation of Nature in Art. New York: Dover Publications.
• [2] Engels, F. (1888/1998). Letter to Margaret Harkness. In Ch. Harrison, P. Wood, J. Gaiger (Eds.). Art in Theory 1815–1900. An Athology of Changing Ideas. Oxford: Blackwell, 763–764.
• [3] Gbadegesin, O. (1991). Presenting This Issue. Ultimate Reality and Meaning, 14.1.
• [4] Heidegger, M. (1984). The Origin of the Work of Art. In S.D. Ross (Ed.). Art and Its Significance: An Anthology of Aesthetic Theory. Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press.
• [5] Husserl, E. (1972). Krize evropských věd a transcendentální fenomenologie. Prague: Academia.
• [6] Lukács, G. (1981). Die Eigenart des Aesthetischen. Vol. 1. Berlin-Weimar: Aufbau Verlag.
• [7] Mampra, T. (1988). Religious Experience and Revelation. Journal of Dharma, 13.
• [8] Pandey, K. Ch. (1985). Abhinavagupta. Cultural Leaders of India: Aestheticians. New Delhi: Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.
• [9] Plato (1984). “Ion,” Art and Its Significance: An Anthology of Aesthetic Theory. In S. D. Ross (Ed.). Albany, N.Y.: State University of New York Press.
• [10] Sangarakshita (1987). A Survey of Buddhism. London: Tharpa Publications.
• [11] Sri Aurobindo (1984). The Synthesis of Yoga. Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram.
• [12] Wittgenstein, L. (1983). Lectures and Conversations on Aesthetics, Psychology, and Religious Belief. In C. Barrett (Ed.). Berkeley-Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/s13374-011-0014-8