[Federico]

Eu nu mai stiu ce este aceea arta caci counterfeit philosophies have polluted all of my thoughts (in fact, m-am lehamisit atit de rau de termenul asta incit daca mai aud pe cineva in real life pronuntindu-l cred ca am sa incep sa musc, latru si zgirii), iar aberatiile alea de un apodictism gretzos pe care le-ai citat au fost emise… din pura instinctualitate – cred ca vorbea prin mine acolo strict ecoul unor spuse ale lui Dylan din No Direction Home (ca tot suntem la documentare). Omul exact asta marturisea (referindu-se, ce-i drept, la perioada incipienta a carierei sale): ca nu isi intelege cintecele, ca nu le poate explica, nu stie de unde vin, si le scrie doar pentru ca he feels like it. Daaaar… in ce priveste critica ratiunii tehnice, senzatia mea e ca tot argumentul se reduce la faptul cvasi-evident ca abiprta nu se poate invata. Instruirea tehnica, ratiunea, cultura nu au un aport pozitiv; ele sunt doar elementele parafernaliei de epurare si lustruire a lentilei prin care urmeaza sa transpara ceea ce este dat la modul imuabil, si care este numit in genere talent sau geniu… sau instinct (estetic). So contentziunea mea este ca teoria instincului corespunde cu precadere componentei intentionale a procesului creativ. Motorul primordial al comportamentului artistic nu poate avea o justificare conceptuala, interesata, computationala - acesta se identifica cu o inclinatie viscerala care daca nu este onorata il rapune prompt si inexorabil, fizi(ologi)c vorbind, pe prea-fericitul posesor al harului. Insa pe partea metodologiei de mosire a acestui prunc rosemary-an transcendental, si de imbracare a lui in straie sensibile, materiale, se poate negocia cu un dram de indulgenta si cu valetii triviali ai ratiunii subiective.
Deci, cum spuneam, eu nu stiu ce-i aia arta si nici nu ma mai intereseaza sa stiu (in cel mai optimist caz se poate spune ca este doar un cuvint utterly lipsit de sens si de un semnificat real), dar adevarul (how ironic, Dickie!) e ca mi-au provocat o satisfactie psihedelico-halucinogenica niste textulete citate recent de Rorty pe subiectul asta in Irony, Contingency, Solidarity.

The agelastes [Rabelais's word for those who do not laugh], the non-thought of received ideas, and kitsch are one and the same, the three-headed enemy of the art born as the echo of God's laughter, the art that created the fascinating imaginative realm where no one owns the truth and everyone has the right to be understood. That imaginative realm of tolerance was born with modern Europe, it is the very image of Europeof at least our dream of Europe, a dream many times betrayed but nonetheless strong enough to unite us all in the fraternity that stretches far beyond the little European continent. But we know that the world where the individual is respected (the imaginative world of the novel, and the real one of Europe) is fragile and perishable. . . if European culture seems under threat today, if the threat from within and without hangs over what is most precious about it - its respect for the individual, for his original thought, and for his right to an inviolable private life - then, I believe, that precious essence of the European spirit is being held safe as in a treasure chest inside the history of the novel, the wisdom of the novel. (Kundera)

Lolita has no moral in tow. For me a work of fiction exists only in so far as it affords me what I shall bluntly call aesthetic bliss, that is a sense of being somehow, somewhere, connected with other states of being where art (curiosity, tenderness, kindness,ecstasy) is the norm. There are not many such books. All the rest is either topical trash or what some call the Literature of Ideas, which very often is topical trash coming in huge blocks of plaster that are carefully transmitted from age to age until somebody comes along with a hammer and takes a good crack at Balzac, at Gorki, at Mann. (N.)

Ceea ce imi cam taie craca de sub picioare, nu? Pentru ca VN a fost un artist cu care merita sa-ti pierzi timpul (chiar mi-am luat ieri Pale Fire de recitit – cu prefata de Rorty, ahahaha) si se pare ca stia ce facea, si ce voia de la arta. Dar cred ca ratiunea asta, teoria lui/lor nu era una motoare, cauzala – filosofia lor este post-emergenta actiunii, iar nu aprioric-normativa.