JeanPaul_Sartre_JeanPaul_Sartre_Basic_Writing

JeanPaul_Sartre_JeanPaul_Sartre_Basic_Writing JeanPaul_Sartre_JeanPaul_Sartre_Basic_Writing

13.07.2015 Views

The work of art291being a painting, but he does try to explain how it is possible to see somethingas a painting. He also claims that a painting may effect peculiar ontologicalsyntheses. For example, he says in What is Literature? that ‘Tintoretto didnot choose that yellow rift in the sky above Golgotha to signify anguish or toprovoke it. It is anguish and yellow sky at the same time. Not sky of anguishor anguished sky: it is an anguish become thing, an anguish that has turnedinto yellow rift of sky’ (p. 3). It is doubtful whether Sartre knows Tintoretto’sintentions, and doubtful whether they affect the truth of the crucial identificationof anguish with the yellow sky. Anguish is an emotion, something intrinsicallyunobservable but undergone. A painted rift in the sky is observable and itlacks literal sense to say it is undergone, even though I might undergosomething on observing it. However, if we could see anguish it might looklike Tintoretto’s yellow sky. Anguish and his sky have something in commonwhich is more aesthetically conspicuous than the differences between them.The yellow sky could be an expression of anguish. It could be anguishmade outward in paint, rather perhaps, as speech is the expression ofthought. Speech is thought made outward in sound. Can you hear thinking?Perhaps listening to speech is the nearest possibility.Rather as a piece of music is neither its performance nor its score, apainting is not a distribution of paint on canvas even though to destroy anintentionally painted canvas is enough to destroy a painting, and tointentionally put paint on canvas is enough to bring a painting into existence.A painting is not identical with what is necessary and sufficient for its existence.The painted canvas is only the distribution of paint molecules on a surface,or a grouping of phenomenological colours. Something makes the canvas,wood and paint count as, say, a painting of Charles VIII. A painting is not whata painting is a painting of (excluding certain ambitiously self-reflexivepaintings). A painting of Charles VIII is not Charles VIII. A painting is something‘between’ the canvas and what it is a painting of. It is neither but it dependson both.Sartre says a painting is an ‘unreality’, and an ‘aesthetic object’. It is aproduct of the special kind of consciousness he calls ‘imaginativeconsciousness’. Rather dramatically, imaginative consciousness negatesthe world and freely generates its own substitute unrealities. Visuallyconfronted with the physical object that is wood, canvas and paint imaginativeconsciousness sees this as a painting of Charles VIII. The content of thisact of imagination is not an image. Sartre is not claiming that an image of

292Jean-Paul Sartre: Basic WritingsCharles VIII psychologically accompanies the visual presentation of thepainted canvas. It is not the case that two things are presentedsimultaneously: the painted canvas and the image. Rather, that paintedcanvas is seen in a special way, as something phenomenologically similarto the visual appearance of Charles VIII.Sartre tries to draw a distinction between cinema and theatre when hesays ‘A tree for a cinema-goer is a real tree, while a tree on the stage isobviously synthetic’ but this provides us at best with an inductivegeneralisation about some films and some plays. Mid-twentieth-centuryblack and white films frequently include artificial scenery and a theatre playmight deploy real trees or plants. Sartre misses the point that in watching aplay we see real people but in watching a film we see pictures of people,and each showing of a play is a performance of that play but each showingof a film is not a performance of that film.Sartre claims ‘It is not the character who becomes real in the actor, it isthe actor who becomes unreal in his character’. Hamlet never becomesnon-fictional in a performance or film showing of Hamlet but the living psychophysicalwhole human being who is the actor who plays Hamlet is negatedor ignored by an act of imagination by the audience. The audience sees theactor as Hamlet but they do not mix him up with a real prince of Denmark.Although Sartre never published any poetry, it is clear that he regardspoetry as a radical art form. He says in What is Literature?: ‘the poet isoutside language’ (p. 6). Sartre takes the neo-Hegelian view that languageis the ‘element’ in which human beings exist, rather, perhaps as fish exist inwater. With the exception of rare individuals such as Nausea’s Roquentinhuman reality is mediated by language. The world appears to us throughour language. Poets are capable of escaping this linguistic prison andperceive things in their bare particularity. With unscientific detachment theyconcatenate words in original forms to present us with newphenomenologies of things. Sartre says of the poet ‘He sees words insideout’.A work of art involves an image and what Sartre calls an ‘analogue’. Theanalogue of a work of art is its material vehicle. The analogue of a poem ora novel is the ink distributed over the page, the analogue of a painting is thewood, canvas and paint, the analogue of a character in a play is the actorwho plays that character. The existence of the analogue is a necessarycondition for the existence of the work of art, at least as a publically availableobject.

292Jean-Paul <strong>Sartre</strong>: <strong>Basic</strong> <strong>Writing</strong>sCharles VIII psychologically accompanies the visual presentation of thepainted canvas. It is not the case that two things are presentedsimultaneously: the painted canvas and the image. Rather, that paintedcanvas is seen in a special way, as something phenomenologically similarto the visual appearance of Charles VIII.<strong>Sartre</strong> tries to draw a distinction between cinema and theatre when hesays ‘A tree for a cinema-goer is a real tree, while a tree on the stage isobviously synthetic’ but this provides us at best with an inductivegeneralisation about some films and some plays. Mid-twentieth-centuryblack and white films frequently include artificial scenery and a theatre playmight deploy real trees or plants. <strong>Sartre</strong> misses the point that in watching aplay we see real people but in watching a film we see pictures of people,and each showing of a play is a performance of that play but each showingof a film is not a performance of that film.<strong>Sartre</strong> claims ‘It is not the character who becomes real in the actor, it isthe actor who becomes unreal in his character’. Hamlet never becomesnon-fictional in a performance or film showing of Hamlet but the living psychophysicalwhole human being who is the actor who plays Hamlet is negatedor ignored by an act of imagination by the audience. The audience sees theactor as Hamlet but they do not mix him up with a real prince of Denmark.Although <strong>Sartre</strong> never published any poetry, it is clear that he regardspoetry as a radical art form. He says in What is Literature?: ‘the poet isoutside language’ (p. 6). <strong>Sartre</strong> takes the neo-Hegelian view that languageis the ‘element’ in which human beings exist, rather, perhaps as fish exist inwater. With the exception of rare individuals such as Nausea’s Roquentinhuman reality is mediated by language. The world appears to us throughour language. Poets are capable of escaping this linguistic prison andperceive things in their bare particularity. With unscientific detachment theyconcatenate words in original forms to present us with newphenomenologies of things. <strong>Sartre</strong> says of the poet ‘He sees words insideout’.A work of art involves an image and what <strong>Sartre</strong> calls an ‘analogue’. Theanalogue of a work of art is its material vehicle. The analogue of a poem ora novel is the ink distributed over the page, the analogue of a painting is thewood, canvas and paint, the analogue of a character in a play is the actorwho plays that character. The existence of the analogue is a necessarycondition for the existence of the work of art, at least as a publically availableobject.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!