|
The Relationship between Aristotle's Energeia and the Ontology of Work of Art through Agamben and Gadamer`s Prism
|
Sepehr Salimi   , Ali Salmani * |
| Bu-Ali Sina University, Art and Architecture Faculty, Philosophy of Art & Philosophy of Art |
|
|
Abstract: (1 Views) |
The traditional conception of art as mimesis, when confronted with the challenges of contemporary art, from mechanical reproduction to the crisis of authenticity, proves insufficient for an ontological account of the work of art. Yet Aristotle’s concept of energeia (being-at-work, actuality) has persisted throughout the history of the philosophy of art and can furnish a foundation for a non-instrumental and non-representational understanding of art. Within this context, both Hans-Georg Gadamer and Giorgio Agamben have drawn upon Aristotelian energeia to formulate an ontology of the work of art; their interpretations, however, appear to move in two opposing directions: one toward the full realization of meaning in performance, the other toward the suspension of meaning and the preservation of potentiality within actuality. The central problem of this study is to elucidate the nature of this divergence and the possibility of their convergence within a shared dialectical horizon. There is a conspicuous absence of a comparative study that examines energeia as a horizon for critical dialogue between two significant currents of contemporary philosophy, namely philosophical hermeneutics and politico-linguistic ontology. By posing the question of how the articulation of Aristotle’s concept of energeia in Gadamer and Agamben establishes a productive tension within a dialectical horizon, this study demonstrates how this concept can simultaneously address the crisis of authenticity in contemporary art and move beyond worn-out dualisms such as original/copy and meaning/suspension. Through separate analyses of Gadamer’s and Agamben’s philosophical projects, the article shows how each thinker cultivates a distinct dimension of this concept: energeia as the meaning-realizing actuality in the event of understanding and the transformation of form into structure (Gebilde) in Gadamer, and energeia read as the preservation of potentiality against any imposed determination within the horizon of the ontology of potentiality and impotentiality in Agamben. The study reveals that the divergence between the two readings is not a misunderstanding but a necessary consequence of two fundamentally different philosophical projects: one seeks to make art the stage for the openness of understanding and dialogue, the other the site of resistance against the logic of sovereignty and work. Nevertheless, the tension between them is already latent within Aristotle’s concept of energeia itself, which both strives toward completion and, precisely because it is complete at every moment, resists any advance toward a final end. The article concludes that the experience of the work of art is nothing other than a rhythmic oscillation between these two poles: a work that simultaneously creates a world of meaning and resists definitive fixation. This “rhythmic ontology,” emerging from the comparative rereading, yields a novel understanding of contemporary art in which truth and freedom are conceived as two moments of a single pulse within the actuality of the work of art. |
|
| Keywords: Aristotle, energeia, Agamben, poiesis, Gadamer, actualization |
|
|
Full-Text [DOCX 116 kb]
(1 Downloads)
|
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2026/04/28 | Accepted: 2026/08/26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Send email to the article author |
|
|
|
| Add your comments about this article |
|
|
|
