Pynchon's "muse" (was ...

[Terrance]

jbor wrote:
> 
> ----------
> >From: "Otto Sell" <o.sell at telda.net>
> 
> Thanks Otto. Welsch's explanation and examples make the point very clearly
> and effectively imo.
> 
> http://www.uni-magdeburg.de/iphi/ww/papers/Beyond.html#text8
> 
> from 'Aesthetics Beyond Aesthetics'
> 
> [ ... ]

"And these new concepts will certainly have some aspects in
common with the
concepts formerly dominant, but differ from them sharply in
other, no less
important, aspects. This is obvious in every shift from one
style or paradigm to
another." 

This is an important step for the Pluralist.  



"Hence, artistic paradigms are connected by some overlaps
from one
concept to the next (by `family resemblances' in the
Wittgensteinian sense), but
there is no universal pattern common to them all or
representing an essential core of
all works of art." 

Excellent! 

 "There is no such thing as an essence of art." 

Now, there are several problems here. First, the so called
"Traditional Aesthetics" in this essay is Platonic, not
Greek, not Classical.  The arguments here is against
generalities that ascend to ideals. So one should not fall
into generalities. But of course I'm playing a bit unfair
here with the language, i.e., "classical," "traditional."
However, although he traces the etymology to Greek, it's a
bad habit, one that drives me mad, to treat the Greeks as if
they all agreed with Plato. Or with Aristotle for that
matter. They did not. Wittgenstein's "family resemblences"
(PI 66,67),  an expression, has to do with characterizing
similarities. Kinda like Aristotle not Plato. Also, W's
claim to the particulars of perception is Greek, but it
belongs to the Sophists and  does not privilege the eye,
this could be said of Aristotle.  In any event, oh yes, he
gets Dewey wrong, but it's an interesting essay, not because
of what it fails to get right but for what it proposes.  For
this aesthetic beyond aesthetic see Plato's Hippias, the
Sophist most impervious to the reality of universals, whose
mastery over the  multitude of particulars is demonstrated
by his ear and family resemblences--his ability to remember
fifty names after Hearing them only once. 

Socrates: He asks you not what is beautiful, but what is
beauty.

Hippias: I understand, my good sir, and I will indeed tell
him what is beauty, defying anyone to refute me. I assure
you Socrates, if I must speak the truth, that a beautiful
maiden is beauty.

http://faculty.ed.uiuc.edu/burbules/ncb/syllabi/Materials/Eagleton.html

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v20/n22/eagl2022.htm