The possibility of a contemporary sublime
Alison
centuries from the Kantian reference of a sensation belonging to the
supersensible self - the realm beyond human reason - that distinguished
an area where the most fearful, yet often the most pleasurable emotion
exists. The contemporary world of thought now believes that nothing is
beyond human comprehension and the idea of the 'sublime' in its original
context is in danger of being made redundant.
Having now traced the historical context of the term from Longinus in
the first century to Burke's 'Philosophical Enquiry into the origin of
our ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful' 1757, and Kant's 'The Critique
of Judgement' 1790, through to Lyotard's resurrection as the post-modern
sublime in his essay 'Presenting the Unpresentable: The Sublime' 1982
and 'The Sublime and the Avant-garde' 1983 and consequently Newman's
paper on 'The Sublime is Now' 1948 , I now intend to investigate the
possibilities of re-inventing the term in favour of contemporary thought
and its relation to the future of today's Abstract Art without
abandoning its original historical context. In the process, it may be
necessary to reference damaging distortions to the Kantian term during
the abandonment of what is now seen as hierarchical thinking, which may
have threatened the rejection of fundamental and universal sensations
that humans need in order to feel emotionally connected to the world.
In terms of my continuing practise as an Abstract Artist, the
relationship with philosophy has become inextricably entangled in my own
progress. I find it essential to continually ask such questions as: can
Abstract Art be capable of acting as a form of visual philosophy, as
initially instigated by Malevich ? The exciting possibilities of now
opening up the dialogue on a global scale where the unsolvable pluralism
of ideas as promoted by Lyotard, such as 'nothingness', 'silence', 'the
now' and 'the sublime', is being made possible across many different
cultures. In order to discuss the progression of thoughts and non
representational art by the events of the early twentieth century and by
the exclusion of such a dialogue under the hegemonic structure of what
we have come to understand as 'modernity', it is essential to invite
those outside of what we call *Western* to enter the dialogue.
The need for this dialogue has become inextricably linked in the demands
of both artist and audience in today's Western art world. Yet in Western
art controversy and conflict are almost essential if any engagement is
to be made with the viewer. Aesthetic satisfaction is all but obsolete
and sensibility disregarded in favour of artificially stimulated
emotions thrust upon the audience where the tension created allows the
audience to react and respond. Can this then be called a dialogue ? If
Art is to be seen as a dialogue then can it be so if it is imposed on
the audience, or where it presents absolutes or finals ?
My research seeks to define the possibilities that contemporary art is
preventing this dialogue through its self indulgent shock tactics, and
to investigate the effect this has had on both the viewer and the artist
in an attempt to distinguish if the current path of contemporary art is
a valid and necessary one. It will argue that the lack of distinction in
terminology, theories and values is preventing the sense of strong
values necessary in order to promote progressive thought. It will
challenge post-modern theory and the possibility that it is paralysing
creativity today.
Any thoughts much appreciated .
--
Alison A Raimes
ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk