Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  aesthesis
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
The paper investigates changes in today aesthetics. It is demonstrated that the ongoing transformation of traditional aesthetics into aisthesis with its broader scope of influence calls for a review of to-date methodology in aesthetical research. Historical doxography, mere accounts of the past—even relating the most coherent and complete developments and events—hardly (if at all) harmonise with the new approach to aesthetics, and could well distort and weaken it. The enlargement of the subject-matter of aesthetics and the clash between aesthetics and the aporias of the modern approach to history allow both fields to experience modernity to a rather broad degree; both refer to aesthetics.
Avant
|
2018
|
vol. 9
|
issue 2
157-167
EN
In this paper I compare how Michel Henry and Henri Maldiney interpret Kandinsky’s heritage. Henry’s phenomenology is based on a distinction between two main modes of manifestation: the ordinary one, that is, the manifestation of the world, and the “manifestation of life.” For him, Kandinsky’s work provides a paradigmatic example of the second, more original mode of manifestation, which is free from all forms of self-alienation. Henry claims that this living through the work of art is transformative; it is akin to ascetic practice or mystical experience that goes beyond the distinction of the subject and the object. Maldiney acknowledges Kandinsky’s work as an attempt to provide access to an a-cosmic and ahistoric experience of one’s inner self; yet for him this is not a positive characteristic. For Maldiney, the key distinction is not between modes of phenomenalisation, but between the dimensions of meaning (sens). For him there is no radical self-transformation which is not a transformation of one’s being-in-the-world and one’s meaning of the world, and so Kandinsky’s a-cosmic paintings cannot induce a true transformation of the self. I conclude that the disagreement of Henry and Maldiney on Kandinsky does not unfold on the level of phenomenological description of concrete aesthetic experience, but on the level of metaphysics.
EN
This article analyses mindfulness as an ascetic and aisthetic practice – a form of perception training largely shaped by strictly Western cultural processes dating back to the late 19th century: modern patterns of perception and habitual regimes, including forms of aesthetic contemplation, which permeate our everyday life – as well as the anaesthetic response to the hypertrophy of the aesthetic. Understood as a training of senses, stemming from the need to experience the sense (meaning) at its fundamental psychophysical level, mindfulness is discussed here as a response to the entire constellation of needs and deficits, overlapping with and specific to Western modernity, including the sense of disembodiment (desomatisation), communication overload, and hyperaestheticisation. From this point of view, mindfulness practices might be recognised both as a refinement of aisthetic experience and a form of sensory asceticism. Without disregarding its Buddhist origins, the text draws attention to the elements of mindfulness ideas and practices that seem to be closely related to the Western cultural context, with a particular focus on (broadly understood) aesthetic ideas of the 20th-century modernism.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.