Ferrara, “Ch. 5-Heidegger’s Philosophy of Art”

Heidegger takes a turn in is his work after publishing Being and Time of which would lead him to what is believed as the original Greek thought. Heidegger explains that the way of early Greek thinking was that of apprehension but not with the traditional connotations as we understand the word today. Early Greeks thought of apprehension in its purest from as the acquiring, collecting or gathering of things. The things more specifically could be ideas. Through meditative thought one could release them self from the will of wanting something and be completely open, then, to wait for what we are actually waiting for. This waiting that is spoken of is also not the typical idea of the work. Waiting is used in a manner to explain a lack of expectation for something. This waiting otherwise, as Heidegger explains, would be connotative of human wants—waiting for some subjective thing to appear. By releasing into a state of waiting, without the influence of desires, one opens to the ability for the thing to appear. The thinker is not merely passive because he/she may question the viewer at anytime as to what they are experiencing.

The idea of work and art is discussed in this chapter. The difference between the material of what the art is made of and the idea it encompasses are now being brought together because it is not what things are made of or what they represent or mean that is important but what they are for. Heidegger uses “les souliers” by Van Gogh to explain his meaning. The shoes are made of leather, thread, and nails. They are what they are meant to serve which is to protect the feet. By looking at equipment as they are and not how they are used we can see what the Greeks called aletheia or “truth.” By looking at the being of the shoes you can see the truth of their purpose. This is important to Heidegger’s conception of art. Taking a leap away from the traditional aesthetics Heidegger says to look at what is going on “in” the work to see the truth of what they are meant for, something that is normally concealed. If the work is a representation of the being of some object then it is in how it is presented that shows the truth of the object not the actual likeness of the real thing it represents.

The next extension of this chapter moves into the new distinctions Heidegger laid down early in his work On the Origin of the Work of Art. This distinction is that of “Earth” and “Worldliness.” Earth is just that, the actual materials by which the work is made and Worldliness is what is created within the work of Art itself. The “World” of any art, according to Heidegger, is what is unconcealed to us, inherent in the work. For the shoes painting, this would mean that the paint, fabric canvas, and possibly wooden or metal frame are of the concealed ‘earth’. They are present in a way that is the “truth” occurring in the background of what is the unconcealed in the “world” of the painting that is to say the shoes and the story they depict. The rift-design is where the two, both earth and world, come together. The rift-design is most literally the design or form under which the art was created. This is the syntax of any work of art.

For art to happen there must be an appreciation by the viewer. Heidegger views the role of the appreciator as important as the creator because it is in the viewer that the artwork is preserved. Meaning, the artist brings something into being as a work of art but it is only in those who admire it art who can preserve the piece in its being. Ferrara mentions and old familiar adage that goes “if a tree falls in the woods and there is no one to hear it, does it make a sound? The answer given was yes it makes physical sound that animals might hear but without the presence of man there can be no meaningful sound because meaning is a human concept. Furthering the importance of the alethia of a work of art, if one can divulge the struggle between the earth and the world of the art then and only then can the truth be brought out of its being. “Art works must be studied in such a way that all of their elements combine into a conscious experience,” is what Dr. Ferrara is saying Heidegger wants us to know.

Reaction

I do not have much to say in the way of this philosophy. I understand it, especially about art and its origin under Heideggerian dictum but I feel like it is making an extra layer somewhere. I am not sure of what I mean by this, however, something does not sit right with me when I think about what art means and what makes mere objects separate from art. What I find quite interesting about these ideas are that they run parallel to much of the eastern philosophy in both religion and scientific thought. Much of these ideas are about bringing Dasein or being-there into some oneness with experience and existence, in particular in Heidegger’s interpretation of early Greek “Meditation” thought or being in “waiting” for what is present to show itself. This is well known in Buddhism for example that by allowing the truth to present itself by getting out of the way one can truly see the physical world for what it is. Western philosophy as derived from the Greeks is riddled with vanity in that is seeks to know answers of the truth of existence and experience but for egoist purpose. There seems to be a small bit of personal credit for “understanding” in the West. As if, for one to understand it makes this “His” knowledge and able to control or at least predict with it. Someday we will ‘really’ see the true meaning of the existence of all things and it will be very far away from what we currently think we know according to western fundamentals.