《明镜中的海德格尔:艺术作品的起源》和马塞尔·杜尚

A. Alkhas
{"title":"《明镜中的海德格尔:艺术作品的起源》和马塞尔·杜尚","authors":"A. Alkhas","doi":"10.5840/JPHILNEPAL201051212","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I. Introduction \"The picture hangs on the wall like a rifle or a hat.\" This statement might well be attributed to Marcel Duchamp, the 'originator' of the readymade, if one were to hazard an educated guess, but it is in fact from the introductory pages of Martin Heidegger's 1936 essay \"The Origin of the Work of Art\" (\"Der Ursprung des Kunstwerkes\"). (1) Heidegger (1889-1976) and Duchamp (1887-1968) lived parallel lives that do not seem to have crossed on the historical plane. And yet, intersection occurs as Heidegger moves toward an aestheticization of philosophy and Duchamp moves toward a philosophization of art. This intersection is seemingly disavowed on both sides. Heidegger, who catalogs more than a dozen exemplary \"great\" works of art in his influential essay, chooses none from the twentieth century. (2) Duchamp satirizes the question of ontology in his remarks to Pierre Cabanne: \"I don't believe in the word 'being.' The idea of being is a human invention ... It's an essential concept, which doesn't exist at all in reality.\" (3) The contradiction stemming from Duchamp's avowed disbelief in \"being,\" which he then explains using terms related to being (\"human,\" \"being is,\" \"essential,\" \"exist,\" \"reality\") suggests, however, his awareness that one cannot escape from the question of being. Indeed, Duchamp's works explore forms of being and display striking affinities with Heidegger's explorations in \"The Origin of the Work of Art.\" Heidegger, on the other hand, surreptitiously slips a twentieth century work of art into his catalog of \"great\" art: his own essay, \"The Origin of the Work of Art,\" thus acknowledging the potential of contemporary art to be \"an essential and necessary way in which that truth happens which is decisive for our historical existence.\" (4) \"The Origin of the Work of Art\" is based on lectures given in 1935 and 1936, over twenty years after the advent of Duchamp's readymades. The essay appears soon after Heidegger's so-called Kehre, or turn, when he purportedly switched course and began to pursue a more radical questioning of metaphysics, attempting to return to the beginnings of Greek thought and abandoning traditional philosophical discourse in favor of a more poetic style. (5) Thomas McEvilley in his article \"Empyrrhical Thinking (and Why Kant Can't)\" has described Duchamp's abandonment of painting, (6) which occurred soon after he introduced the readymades, as a decisive \"turn,\" one that \"was to be so portentous for the art of the rest of the 20th century.\" (7) McEvilley outlines how critics sought the cause of this important shift, ascribing it, for example, to Duchamp's two-month visit to Munich in 1912. For McEvilley, however, it was Duchamp's (re-)reading of Greek philosophers during his stint as a librarian at the Bibliotheque Sainte Genevieve in 1913 that had the greatest influence in triggering his \"turn away from subjectivity.\" (8) Among the philosophers that he studied, it was Pyrrho, the first great skeptic, who especially intrigued Duchamp, perhaps in part because Pyrrho was known for having abandoned painting for philosophy. (9) Duchamp's aspiration to become more philosophical in his art mirrors Heidegger's aspiration to be more poetical in his philosophy, their shared mistrust of subjectivity leading each of them to question the continued viability of art on the one hand and philosophy on the other. Heidegger titles a late essay \"The End of Philosophy and the Task of Thinking,\" and Duchamp is often credited with-and blamed for-announcing the end of art. (10) Despite their apparent pessimism (characterized in Heidegger's case by a heavy-handed, prophetic tone in stark contrast to Duchamp's playful ironic detachment) their projects are essentially positive. In order to reinvigorate our experience of being in the world, (11) they seek to circumvent the impasse they believe has been created by metaphysics' ill-founded reliance on subjectivity by reconnecting with earlier modes of thought. …","PeriodicalId":288505,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Philosophy: A Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Heidegger in Plain Sight: “The Origin of the Work of Art” and Marcel Duchamp\",\"authors\":\"A. Alkhas\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/JPHILNEPAL201051212\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I. Introduction \\\"The picture hangs on the wall like a rifle or a hat.\\\" This statement might well be attributed to Marcel Duchamp, the 'originator' of the readymade, if one were to hazard an educated guess, but it is in fact from the introductory pages of Martin Heidegger's 1936 essay \\\"The Origin of the Work of Art\\\" (\\\"Der Ursprung des Kunstwerkes\\\"). (1) Heidegger (1889-1976) and Duchamp (1887-1968) lived parallel lives that do not seem to have crossed on the historical plane. And yet, intersection occurs as Heidegger moves toward an aestheticization of philosophy and Duchamp moves toward a philosophization of art. This intersection is seemingly disavowed on both sides. Heidegger, who catalogs more than a dozen exemplary \\\"great\\\" works of art in his influential essay, chooses none from the twentieth century. (2) Duchamp satirizes the question of ontology in his remarks to Pierre Cabanne: \\\"I don't believe in the word 'being.' The idea of being is a human invention ... It's an essential concept, which doesn't exist at all in reality.\\\" (3) The contradiction stemming from Duchamp's avowed disbelief in \\\"being,\\\" which he then explains using terms related to being (\\\"human,\\\" \\\"being is,\\\" \\\"essential,\\\" \\\"exist,\\\" \\\"reality\\\") suggests, however, his awareness that one cannot escape from the question of being. Indeed, Duchamp's works explore forms of being and display striking affinities with Heidegger's explorations in \\\"The Origin of the Work of Art.\\\" Heidegger, on the other hand, surreptitiously slips a twentieth century work of art into his catalog of \\\"great\\\" art: his own essay, \\\"The Origin of the Work of Art,\\\" thus acknowledging the potential of contemporary art to be \\\"an essential and necessary way in which that truth happens which is decisive for our historical existence.\\\" (4) \\\"The Origin of the Work of Art\\\" is based on lectures given in 1935 and 1936, over twenty years after the advent of Duchamp's readymades. The essay appears soon after Heidegger's so-called Kehre, or turn, when he purportedly switched course and began to pursue a more radical questioning of metaphysics, attempting to return to the beginnings of Greek thought and abandoning traditional philosophical discourse in favor of a more poetic style. (5) Thomas McEvilley in his article \\\"Empyrrhical Thinking (and Why Kant Can't)\\\" has described Duchamp's abandonment of painting, (6) which occurred soon after he introduced the readymades, as a decisive \\\"turn,\\\" one that \\\"was to be so portentous for the art of the rest of the 20th century.\\\" (7) McEvilley outlines how critics sought the cause of this important shift, ascribing it, for example, to Duchamp's two-month visit to Munich in 1912. For McEvilley, however, it was Duchamp's (re-)reading of Greek philosophers during his stint as a librarian at the Bibliotheque Sainte Genevieve in 1913 that had the greatest influence in triggering his \\\"turn away from subjectivity.\\\" (8) Among the philosophers that he studied, it was Pyrrho, the first great skeptic, who especially intrigued Duchamp, perhaps in part because Pyrrho was known for having abandoned painting for philosophy. (9) Duchamp's aspiration to become more philosophical in his art mirrors Heidegger's aspiration to be more poetical in his philosophy, their shared mistrust of subjectivity leading each of them to question the continued viability of art on the one hand and philosophy on the other. Heidegger titles a late essay \\\"The End of Philosophy and the Task of Thinking,\\\" and Duchamp is often credited with-and blamed for-announcing the end of art. (10) Despite their apparent pessimism (characterized in Heidegger's case by a heavy-handed, prophetic tone in stark contrast to Duchamp's playful ironic detachment) their projects are essentially positive. In order to reinvigorate our experience of being in the world, (11) they seek to circumvent the impasse they believe has been created by metaphysics' ill-founded reliance on subjectivity by reconnecting with earlier modes of thought. …\",\"PeriodicalId\":288505,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Philosophy: A Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-09-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Philosophy: A Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/JPHILNEPAL201051212\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Philosophy: A Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/JPHILNEPAL201051212","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“这幅画挂在墙上就像一把步枪或一顶帽子。”这句话很可能出自现成品的“鼻祖”马塞尔·杜尚(Marcel Duchamp)之口,但实际上它出自马丁·海德格尔(Martin Heidegger) 1936年的文章《艺术作品的起源》(“Der Ursprung des Kunstwerkes”)的引言页。(1)海德格尔(1889-1976)和杜尚(1887-1968)过着相似的生活,在历史层面上似乎没有交集。然而,当海德格尔走向哲学的审美化和杜尚走向艺术的哲学化时,交集就出现了。双方似乎都否认了这个交集。海德格尔在他那篇颇具影响力的文章中列举了十多件堪称典范的“伟大”艺术作品,却没有选择20世纪的作品。(2)杜尚在对皮埃尔·卡班纳的谈话中讽刺了本体论的问题:“我不相信‘存在’这个词。存在的概念是人类的发明……这是一个基本概念,在现实中根本不存在。”(3)杜尚宣称不相信“存在”,然后他用与存在相关的术语(“人类”、“存在是”、“本质”、“存在”、“现实”)来解释“存在”,由此产生的矛盾表明,他意识到人无法逃避存在的问题。事实上,杜尚的作品探索了存在的形式,并与海德格尔在《艺术作品的起源》中的探索表现出惊人的相似性。另一方面,海德格尔偷偷地把一件二十世纪的艺术作品放进了他的“伟大”艺术目录:他自己的论文《艺术作品的起源》,从而承认当代艺术的潜力是“一种重要和必要的方式,在这种方式中,真理发生了,这对我们的历史存在是决定性的。”(4)“艺术作品的起源”是基于1935年和1936年的讲座,在杜尚的成品出现20多年后。这篇文章出现在海德格尔所谓的Kehre(转向)之后不久,据说他改变了路线,开始追求对形而上学的更激进的质疑,试图回到希腊思想的起点,放弃传统的哲学话语,倾向于更诗意的风格。Thomas McEvilley在他的文章《超然思维(以及为什么康德不能)》中描述了杜尚对绘画的放弃,这是在他引入现成品后不久发生的,是一个决定性的“转折”,一个“对20世纪余下的艺术来说是如此不祥的转折”。(7)麦克艾维利概述了批评家们是如何寻找这一重要转变的原因的,例如,他将其归因于杜尚在1912年对慕尼黑进行的为期两个月的访问。然而,对于麦克埃维利来说,杜尚在1913年担任圣吉纳维耶夫图书馆图书管理员期间对希腊哲学家的(重新)阅读对他产生了最大的影响,促使他“远离主观性”。在他所研究的哲学家中,第一个伟大的怀疑论者皮洛特别引起了杜尚的兴趣,也许部分原因是因为皮洛以放弃绘画而转向哲学而闻名。(9)杜尚希望在他的艺术中变得更哲学的愿望反映了海德格尔希望在他的哲学中变得更诗意的愿望,他们对主体性的共同不信任导致他们每个人都质疑艺术和哲学的持续生存能力。海德格尔晚期的一篇文章的标题是“哲学的终结和思考的任务”,杜尚经常因为宣布艺术的终结而受到赞扬和指责。(10)尽管他们明显的悲观主义(海德格尔的特点是一种严厉的、预言性的语调,与杜尚戏谑的、讽刺的超然形成鲜明对比),他们的计划本质上是积极的。为了重振我们在世界上的经验,(11)他们试图通过重新连接早期的思维模式,来绕过他们认为形而上学对主体性的错误依赖所造成的僵局。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Heidegger in Plain Sight: “The Origin of the Work of Art” and Marcel Duchamp
I. Introduction "The picture hangs on the wall like a rifle or a hat." This statement might well be attributed to Marcel Duchamp, the 'originator' of the readymade, if one were to hazard an educated guess, but it is in fact from the introductory pages of Martin Heidegger's 1936 essay "The Origin of the Work of Art" ("Der Ursprung des Kunstwerkes"). (1) Heidegger (1889-1976) and Duchamp (1887-1968) lived parallel lives that do not seem to have crossed on the historical plane. And yet, intersection occurs as Heidegger moves toward an aestheticization of philosophy and Duchamp moves toward a philosophization of art. This intersection is seemingly disavowed on both sides. Heidegger, who catalogs more than a dozen exemplary "great" works of art in his influential essay, chooses none from the twentieth century. (2) Duchamp satirizes the question of ontology in his remarks to Pierre Cabanne: "I don't believe in the word 'being.' The idea of being is a human invention ... It's an essential concept, which doesn't exist at all in reality." (3) The contradiction stemming from Duchamp's avowed disbelief in "being," which he then explains using terms related to being ("human," "being is," "essential," "exist," "reality") suggests, however, his awareness that one cannot escape from the question of being. Indeed, Duchamp's works explore forms of being and display striking affinities with Heidegger's explorations in "The Origin of the Work of Art." Heidegger, on the other hand, surreptitiously slips a twentieth century work of art into his catalog of "great" art: his own essay, "The Origin of the Work of Art," thus acknowledging the potential of contemporary art to be "an essential and necessary way in which that truth happens which is decisive for our historical existence." (4) "The Origin of the Work of Art" is based on lectures given in 1935 and 1936, over twenty years after the advent of Duchamp's readymades. The essay appears soon after Heidegger's so-called Kehre, or turn, when he purportedly switched course and began to pursue a more radical questioning of metaphysics, attempting to return to the beginnings of Greek thought and abandoning traditional philosophical discourse in favor of a more poetic style. (5) Thomas McEvilley in his article "Empyrrhical Thinking (and Why Kant Can't)" has described Duchamp's abandonment of painting, (6) which occurred soon after he introduced the readymades, as a decisive "turn," one that "was to be so portentous for the art of the rest of the 20th century." (7) McEvilley outlines how critics sought the cause of this important shift, ascribing it, for example, to Duchamp's two-month visit to Munich in 1912. For McEvilley, however, it was Duchamp's (re-)reading of Greek philosophers during his stint as a librarian at the Bibliotheque Sainte Genevieve in 1913 that had the greatest influence in triggering his "turn away from subjectivity." (8) Among the philosophers that he studied, it was Pyrrho, the first great skeptic, who especially intrigued Duchamp, perhaps in part because Pyrrho was known for having abandoned painting for philosophy. (9) Duchamp's aspiration to become more philosophical in his art mirrors Heidegger's aspiration to be more poetical in his philosophy, their shared mistrust of subjectivity leading each of them to question the continued viability of art on the one hand and philosophy on the other. Heidegger titles a late essay "The End of Philosophy and the Task of Thinking," and Duchamp is often credited with-and blamed for-announcing the end of art. (10) Despite their apparent pessimism (characterized in Heidegger's case by a heavy-handed, prophetic tone in stark contrast to Duchamp's playful ironic detachment) their projects are essentially positive. In order to reinvigorate our experience of being in the world, (11) they seek to circumvent the impasse they believe has been created by metaphysics' ill-founded reliance on subjectivity by reconnecting with earlier modes of thought. …
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Emily Dickinson: What Is Called Thinking at the Edge of Chaos? Relational Selves: Gender and Cultural Differences in Moral Reasoning Late Pound: The Case of Canto CVII The Reproduction of Subjectivity and the Turnover-time of Ideology: Speculating with German Idealism, Marx, and Adorno Toward an Ethics of Speculative Design
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1