Gnostic side of the artistic content

in #art4 years ago (edited)

Since in the art (as in science) internal content is nothing more than a reflection of the subject of knowledge, the nature of that content is dictated by the nature of that subject. The object of science is the objective reality, even when the subject of scientific knowledge is man , science must present the social activity, the mind, the psychology of the subject as objective, as objective as the being of nature itself. Thus, the content of science becomes the objective truth. Another is the situation in art. Knowing the relationship between the object and the subject, art acquires a dual cognitive orientation: on the one hand, it reveals the attitude of the object to the subject; knows the being as a value, on the other - reveals the subject's attitude towards the object, knows the system of assessment of being, which is formed in the consciousness of society, class, social group and breaks into the artist's mind. Hence, the content of the art includes dual knowledge - knowledge of the world and self-knowledge of the artist.

image source

Deeply mistaken is the widespread idea that the cognitive power of art manifests itself only in the understanding of the life outside the artist, and his attitude towards this life enters art as a "self-expression," devoid of any cognitive meaning and even opposed to the cognitive orientation of art. Indeed, the "self-expression" of the artist is self-knowledge, but not an automatic fixation of a spontaneous stream of sensations. Even in the simplest case - for example, when the painter creates a scene of nature - the psychological mechanism of the creative act combines the analysis of the depicted object with the self-analysis of the artist, with the deep "understanding" of what he feels, how he feels and why it feels so, not otherwise. The more obvious is the presence and necessity of such an analytic only inculcation of the artist in the creation of a novel, symphony or spectacle. Cognitive processing is always subject to art and what is depicted and what is expressed. Therefore, the cognitive information included in the content of the art is different from the objective truth as the content of scientific knowledge: in the content of the art, objective truth is contradictively associated with the "subjective truth". This is precisely the "subjective truth" and not merely the "printing of subjectivity", because the transformation of self-expression into self-knowledge is nothing more than overcoming the chance, the ambiguity, the chaotic nature of the artist's feelings and experiences, the artist's ability to "Orient" in the "flow" of its consciousness and to differentiate, separate, raise the essential, important, psychologically true. It is only thanks to this that people can find in the individual uniqueness of the artist's soul life something common, socially representative, inherent to them, and not only to the "self-appearing" individual. The spiritual peace of the other person is of interest to me if this person is close to me, dear, beloved; and when it comes to a perfectly unknown or long-dead person, his feelings, experiences and reflections can attract my attention only to the extent that they contain something psychologically substantial, sustainable, deep, true. In this case, the most intimate human documents - private letters, diaries, memoirs - acquire true artistic value. But if the writer chooses for his narrative the form of letters or diary, as did Gogol, Dostoevsky and others, he consciously makes us aware of the subjectively true life of the authors of these papers that interest and excite us, though very well we know that such people have never existed in the world.
It is precisely this merging of the objective and subjective truth in the content of art Belinski calls "poetic truth" and sees in it the main difference between the content of art and the content of science and the main condition for the artistic work of art.

It is not about summing up the objective truth and the subjective truth that allows them to dissociate themselves and the individual existence of each of them. The poetic content of art is not objectively-true scientific content, supplemented by subjective, psychological stigma. The poetic truth is a complete and qualitative kind of phenomenon. It is an objective and subjective truth. the fruit of a deep knowledge of the value relationship between the subject and the subject that characterizes the very subject of art. At the same time, with all the indivisibility of knowledge and self-knowledge in art, these two layers of artistic content may be in different proportions. This is evidenced by the existence of two parallel arts - arts that depict the world, and arts that do not portray it. These two paths of artistic transformation of the world are possible and necessary precisely because the value relationship between the object and the subject allows a dual approach to its knowledge and modeling: an axiological system "object-subject" can be revealed on the part of the object and on the part of subject. In one case, the object of knowledge is the objective reality, reflected in the spiritual world of the artist (literature and acting art, painting and sculpture) and in the other - the spiritual world of man, which reflects and appreciates the objective reality (music, dance, architecture) .

In the history of aesthetic thought, the first genus of art was often referred to as "objective," or "pictorial", and the second as "subjective" or "expressive". These definitions are not very successful, because in all types of art, the inseparable connection between the subject and the subject is recreated, so imagination is impossible in art without expressiveness. These two types of artistic creation could rather be called "epic" and "lyrical" by analogy with the traditional definition of the main literary genera, because in the first case the artist's self-knowledge "conceals" behind the knowledge of the objective reality and " dissolves "in its image, and in the second, on the contrary, self-knowledge is embodied directly in the image of the art, and the knowledge of the outside world is a mediated moment of the artistic content, its second plan, the background or the subtext . The analogous duality of the ways of artistic transformation of life is also found in the comparison of different artistic directions - for example, realism and romanticism, classicism and baroque, impressionism and expressionism, as well as the comparison of different individual styles. These two structures have many specific variations and modifications and they are able to interact directly in the complex structure of synthetic art in such genre forms as the novel-confession or the lyrical film-confession. However, in any case, the specific relationship between knowledge and self-knowledge is always connected in art, because this relationship is conditioned by the structure of the very subject of artistic knowledge. It also dictates the art-specific method of knowledge-a concrete-image that differs from the abstract method of knowledge inherent in science.


Just about the best breakdown I catch anywhere online the written breakdown of all things creative, as always great post and thanks for sharing the unique perspective!

Congratulations! You were upvoted to the cryptkeeper17 manual curation trail! To have all of your posts upvoted like this contact me here or on discord cryptkeeper17#6637 anytime!

Thank you, and you are welcome :)

Ehhhh @godflesh! You have a way with deep thinking!

The content of the art includes dual knowledge - knowledge of the world and self-knowledge of the artist.

True. Both are necessary in giving an artist the complete self-fulfilling satisfaction of expressing his inward self, while at the same time reflecting, and giving meaning to the world view.

The artist is not merely a reporter who writes or paints things the way they are, he reveals their meaning, and raises otherwise trivial daily matters of the age into universal significance.

That comes not just from knowledge of the world, but also from an artists self-knowledge.

You say it all too well. And honest to say, i admire your 'deep thinking'.

Thanks for the comment :)

Well, yes both are necessary but for my subjective taste I prefer much more the path of slef-knowledge then the knowledge to the world.... but the both side valuable. :)

That i much i respect @godflesh. I am taking a keen follow of your discourses. I admire deep thought works. Yours are no less.

Lao Tzu said: "Knowing others is intelligence, knowing yourself is true wisdom" ;)

really interesting, thick with information that takes time to read and collate internally. worth keeping this to re-read again later.

Very nice :)

Thank you.

Hello! I find your post valuable for the art community! Thanks for the great post! ARTzone is now following you! ALWAYs follow @artzone and the artzone tag, and support our artists!

thank you :)

I love the image!

cool :)

You got a 10.09% upvote from @postpromoter courtesy of @godflesh!

Want to promote your posts too? Check out the Steem Bot Tracker website for more info. If you would like to support the development of @postpromoter and the bot tracker please vote for @yabapmatt for witness!


Quite the analysis if I've ever read one, really appreciate the time here taken to explain the philosophical debate within art critcism, "Is it art or trash?", the layman contends with the ordinary and the struggle of some laguid desposition of escapsim trapped in a world of bad definitions. Artists serve their respective crafts and possess a duty to divulge the roots of interpretation through the artwork they create. I rate this a fair explanation, one even a layman can cite, art is ways and means for itself to exist and artists create art -"things" - into existence.

Thank you @godflesh for sharing this insight!

The better you look the more you see!

Coin Marketplace

STEEM 0.46
TRX 0.08
JST 0.060
BTC 49159.84
ETH 4180.02
BNB 550.02
SBD 5.80