Being Othered by Yourself.

 

Part 1; where is Art?

 

 

1.1            Kant answer to this question is very famous. Art is what avoids concepts. Art is then the result do f sapped of impressions which runs too quickly for too slow for concepts to grasp. They reach out, to say this is…and yet the meaning has shifted, moved one is elsewhere.

1.2           Art is the caught up in  slice of pleasure or pain, where exactly how one is being (over all ) delighted is not tied o the single thing. I t is not then this bowl of fruit that one looks on with hungry, but rather it abstraction lingering in the canvas, that fills one with the feeling of beauty.

1.3           Reality slips a gear. It becomes not about what is there, and more about what is not ever quite there – what cannot be located within the world at all.

1.4          But mere light foot thought by itself is not beauty. Beauty needs also to the point is reality, the point of reality, where ideas as such appear to be in the perpetual process of breaking through.

1.5           This breakage is not fixed at a time or place (as the event of the sublime is0. it is rather a process. It is in the moving of the artwork, in its forcing the mind here or there or back again, that it feels as if the ideas of good of kindness, the imperative of helping others are already breaking through.

1.6            The world becomes then not given by concepts, but rather the ideas, the shifting maze works of logical differences that underpin all thought: the world becomes then populated by the reality of thought understood in its, or better as if it were there, were real, and were breaking upon the world.

1.7            It goes without saying this process is indirect. It is a process. He good never falls upon the world,  is rather in the movement in the inability to fully comprehend the beauty of a lily, the mind is forced to turn to ideas, and to treat the idea of goodness or purity as if it were the concept fro the beauty of the lily.

1.8           The idea forms itself as I it were the concept the lily was giving. This is not a direct press (a s it is with concepts);the element are not their, so much as what is not their.

1.9            Good or purity is then not of itself a realizable element in the world. it is an idea, which runs across concept, and pulls the world this way or that without ever being directly there. the lily likewise is then the pulling this way or tat of perception, The giving in the delightful inability to summaries. The giving in an idea of purity that is beyond the world, and which can not be fixed or held.

 

 

2.0     And yet at this point something else becomes apparent.. ideas such as goodness value exists in not being simply themselves. I am good then not because I am, I is not my consciousness that many me good, o much as my conscience; that feeling that I ought to act for all individuals and not merely for myself. The good exists then in the mitigation of a soul, and the allowing for others to exist with it.

2.1           The process of beauty then in turning the mind towards the good needs to echo this move. The good is what is not actually directly summarised by an I think I, so much as and I thinks. It is that with is then not quite caught in the I of a representation, but rather is necessarily caught up it, and looped into a It o man think; tat which everyone or anyone might think.

2.2           The end of the self here I not then death so much as what is collectivise to individuals, what cannot be defined here or now or in this individual or entity.. It is what I shred

2.3           The objects that I find beautiful, are in a sense a perfect still life; a life of things that point to  a frame which is not as it would appear to be. I is not framed in My time as understood as a rubric f consciousness’s much as in that collective feelings they inspire, inspire of shared or collective times; thy resonate even s they lie I that frame with others perceptions, and others grasping of the world: they are what we grasp/

2.4           Or to put it another way, the act of freezing a world into time and holding it down, riveting it to the one place in a frame, change where it is pointing. It no longer point as us, this still life, this collection of object; or better it does not point t our being, so much as that which is between us, that which we share.

2.5           he seeing of another sight given embodied in the frame of the art word, the sharing of what cannot be shared, that is found in that frame, doubled up the community of objects portrayed there. They are no longer rarely together with themselves and with us their delighted viewer, they are also together for all of humanity who share that sight, and this double sharing points to a point we all share, a point that which bind together in imperative joy.

2.6           Art therefore dethrones my ability or right to grasp the world. h world of art I not mine; or better it is mine because what breaks through and is shared is also necessarily yours: it is what allows me to grasp a world as a you – and to grasp the fact thee I might not ever have a simple right to the stuffs in that world.

2.7           I and you then run into each other as we delight in art. What we see is that which is between: hat excites I that we can only share in the looking on the art, and never formally Be ourselves alone.

2.8          What we are then is what being never fully grasps of contains-  It is an us beyond and very other to death. A community of ourselves…..

2.9          The delight is what is beyond is then never merely the mass, nor the world of being. It is rather that which giggles in the face of both in its joyful defiance.

 

 

 Part 2: The dethroning of a time

 

 

3               At which point another element of the frame enter in .The fact that it has a tangible reality, a place where it is, and is as art, challenges so much in our thinking. This place is not after all quite what it should conceptually be. We might the see that frame in I beauty splendour, and yet the movement we look inside it everything’s lost – an we are dragged into another time or place: it mirror takes us to the fight from Egypt, or the  storm by Pyrrhus’s tomb, of the smiling sun of enigmatic Florence. 

3.1           To look into a frame is to be forced to defy time. This defiance might be simply enough; the beauty of a lily as it is present, or better in its present is not a simply part of conscious time: As that is it is no doubt still a simple lily. But as this is – this lily, then what is being thought, what it is making be think is never of this time.

3.2           On the contrary it is reaching beyond the one place, and across all times, as a purity beyond embodiment in a her an how, and yet which once given in  animating a world – is a thing beyond the world which the world can never directly realize, and yet which it must cherish or vale.

3.3           That us what is being embodied in the white here and now of the lily, is something that otherwise only exists in the ideal form as some kind of impulsion or process in the world, a drive to make things right-  an idea of a rightness o be a future to come: A kingdom that will one day in earth.

3.4           This little white flower, then embodies a mystery n he here and now – a future that could not be given at al line the world, and yet which this whiteness appears o create for us all, and place before our delighted minds. The here and the now, then enfolds a secret that is never here or now – it demands we create in on minds for its very giving a flight to a future, a sense of what cannot be in the world, and yet is here in  this lily: the present defies it concept, an become given in another part of time.

3.5           Or again  to hear that symphony play, is of course to be suspended between times-  the between where music is. and yet this suspension is never the fixed 1 2 3 of bad music. I is rather a suspension which defies simple counting – a suspension where what is counted is never clear and the unit change. The motifs, the echoes the sound that realty into and reach across other sounds, then create endless eddies in the temporal move the future, in the listening to he next tune. This sound is then not merely in the this tune, it is also echoing a past series of tunes, and part of n entire picture, yet to emerge.

3.6          The movement to the future is not run through an held together and then merely collected  and then summarised. I is rather stratified and strafed by a thousand othering eddies – point where one cannot finish the summary, even as one is moved on and made the hear something different, something new.

3.7           Music might then always of itself be given in the move to a future, in he reaching beyond what was given and yet that very reaching encompasses within it, pasts a and presents which hare might clearly or simply, defined, and yet rather come to be across what the music  gives; the move o the future then gives also different past even as it moves what was giving changes is its snginifcance0, and n emergent present (the entire sympohny0.

3.8          Music is the direct embodiment f a past which  lives and changes across a non linear, a layering of time, where the very fact that it finishes that these bars appear done with, itself allow for that very doing, that very finishing to become creative, and the change: the motif is then what is a once giving, and yet which can never be in the giving complete; its memory is also open to further giving – further refinement and constantly fiddling challenging change.

3.9          In short art does not bugger time, so much as installs within it eddies that an not linear and never gathered in the single being or relate to the on orchestration of they rather pitch one time within another’s or one tense in others. A here and now becomes also a there and then, or a movement beyond becomes also a hark back, a parts o be done; or an echoes past, becomes  a message to a future to other times and places to be. Art, and its pleasures and pane, tears the temporal form be merely being and mere time: it gives a world of times.

 

 

Summary:

 

4.0         In short it is the role of art to orchestrate that other, that lies between us all , and make its very othering it very collectivity present to us all – and to this by defying the sense that I have a right to a simple time.

4.1     It stops  being simply the me that must be assured at this point and so at the same moment that time itself stops being what is giving anything linear or even bound together: art bring speaks to tenses understood apart from time, and is a place or sense that time itself does not fully encompass; this it not linear or non linear time so much as the articulation of something rather different – the world according to tense played off one in the relation to others.

4.2            The painting is the  beautiful because it is a present that echoes a past, that can only be felt in a future or how it makes one understand what one also must be.

4.3           And yet in making this move Kant is initially cautious. H is worried that the pleasure or the pin art produces ought to be genuinely artistic and not merely titillation

4.4           On might understand this caution two ways. One might merely see it as the sensible reserve of a cautious man anxious to ensure his thought does not lead to boudoirs it whole not. Or else one can see that there is a real reason to his caution.

4.5           Kant's life work was after all to find the pure of thought, understood as the point that consciousness was supreme in the world, and conquers  in the same throw the perception and the boy: all are merely only the creatures of consciousness and conscience.

4.6          We is then a man committed to the purist of withs, and the highest ideas of what can be shared (he concept is the sharing of a though across all times, and conscience the creation of thought across all times).

4.7            And yet the torrent of pleasure and pain that gives us a world and defines our poison in that world in a perceiving body, might very easily drag us from this centring on consciousness or those things very close to it. Pleasure itself is after all a bodily thing –and the sense it can be shared, the sharing it defines is late not in morality and not is the assertion of the I so much (initially at least in the pelasure0 in the pleasure of a self through another.

4.8          Pleasure’s problem is then not that it forms  counter point to morality o much as it dethrones the sovereignty of the I : a I pleasure myself I o so though another or at the point as I am othered. Pleasure is then the point at which my consciousness hand over responsibility to its body (and whatever organs f the mind it has to induce pleasure, and whatever perception case them). It creates problems then because it demands other ‘we’s’ other place one shares the world other senses that one is within that world than merely consciousness can allow.

4.9          What is more it is obvious that this othering will in its sharing bugger up time in is own right. Indeed linear temporality is always opposes to this buggering as it resolution, ads the point a mind or its consciousness claim in desperation a sovereignty, and then (in morality) looks for ideals to bolster that lordship. I is then the point the a mind runs to in desperation as othering forces eddy in. Thence ht othering of art, and the splicing of a temporality beyond any fixing of reality gathered in  single consciousness, becomes a principle of othering to be thought in it own right…..