Who is the artist as a creator (composer) in Michelangelo Buonarroti’s aesthetic thought and how could we define creativity? The author indicates that an artist is characterized by a specific capability – the capability of a creative change by means of which new values can be achieved. However, what does that creative change consist in? The author tries to enlighten the problem of an artist as a creator (composer) and creativity from two perspectives. Firstly, he discusses three main approaches to creativity in the history of aesthetics: God’s creativity, artistic creativity (of a poet and artist) and human creativity (by people of different occupational backgrounds). Secondly, he attempts to determine the hidden dimensions of the phenomenon of an artist as a creator (composer) and creativity. He describes them as versatility, unity and sourcefulness. Those three dimensions are exemplified in an aesthetic motif contained in Michelangelo Buonarotti’s emblem. That emblem constitutes a creative self-image of Michelangelo. In further considerations much attention is devoted to Michelangelo’s poetry, in which the author tries to find the evidence of sourcefulness. It is in sourcefulness where he actually sees the main element of creative change. The symbols of fire and phoenix are interpreted as particular examples of that sourcefulness. In conclusion the author points out that Michelangelo’s thought was an important step to shape the notion of artistic creativity. If creativity is determined by the three dimensions discussed, then the artist as a creator (composer) turns out to be a person able to realize them in an act of creative change and in the process of creative activity.
During the last thirty years or so, there has been a veritable renaissance of the classical ethical idea of the 'art of living'. Far from being restricted to philosophical discourse, it has also successfully entered the arena of popular culture. This renaissance is closely linked to the late work of Foucault, in which he attempts to restore this classical idea, which he thinks is lacking in modern Western societies. The author aims to assess the Foucaultdian idea of the art of living, and argues that Foucault greatly transformed the Graeco-Roman idea by radicalizing the dimension of artistic activity. In the second part of the paper the author asks whether this radicalized idea can live up to Foucault's own emancipatory expectations. Lastly, the author argues that the radicalization of the aesthetic dimension has a contradictory effect.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.