This essay offers an investigation of Patočka’s conception of the meaning of art as presented in his early essays and manuscripts from 1930s and 1940s. Patočka shows that art, philosophy, historiography, religion, politics, and science all represent various “educational powers” that shape human history. The chief sources of inspiration of Patočka’s conception are considered in some detail. His claim that these educational powers represent “creative energies,” which inspire people through creations to which their creators are in turn inspired by those energies is clearly influenced by Bergson. Heideggerian influence, on the other hand, can be discerned in Patočka’s claim that in the works of art, the human world, that is, the general knowledge of the meaning of life and things, is recreated. It is emphasised that art as education not only expresses a knowledge of the meaning of life, but also understanding of the “process” on which this knowledge is based and even the setting of this process in the context of similar attempts at that comprehension. From this perspective, one could argue that an art critic is capable of understanding the nature of art even more completely than the artist, its creator.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Art as Creative Energy and Comprehension of the World: Jan Patočka’s Considerations on Artistic Education

  • Miloš Ševčík

摘要

This essay offers an investigation of Patočka’s conception of the meaning of art as presented in his early essays and manuscripts from 1930s and 1940s. Patočka shows that art, philosophy, historiography, religion, politics, and science all represent various “educational powers” that shape human history. The chief sources of inspiration of Patočka’s conception are considered in some detail. His claim that these educational powers represent “creative energies,” which inspire people through creations to which their creators are in turn inspired by those energies is clearly influenced by Bergson. Heideggerian influence, on the other hand, can be discerned in Patočka’s claim that in the works of art, the human world, that is, the general knowledge of the meaning of life and things, is recreated. It is emphasised that art as education not only expresses a knowledge of the meaning of life, but also understanding of the “process” on which this knowledge is based and even the setting of this process in the context of similar attempts at that comprehension. From this perspective, one could argue that an art critic is capable of understanding the nature of art even more completely than the artist, its creator.