|
|
|
 |
Search published articles |
 |
|
Showing 3 results for Modernity
Muhammad Rahimian Shirmard,
Volume 2, Issue 6 (5-2013)
Abstract
Meaninglessness, as the most important aesthetic
character of the works of Samuel Beckett and Theatre
of the Absurd, is a way by means of which the
modernistic works of art try to confront the annihilation
of meaning and crisis of modernity. Trying
to deny the meaning while utilizing a negative
approach, which in turn arises from the way they
deal with their inner problems, these works can be
seen as endeavors for expressing the ineffability of
the impossible.
In this article it would be discussed, in an Adornoian
aesthetical framework, that the meaninglessness
in Beckett’s plays is not only a philosophical
and artistic necessity, but also comes from the
inevitable enigmas of these works. Accordingly,
the hidden dialectics of these works which makes
them some sort of puzzle, exposes them to multiple
interpretation. Yet, while displaying the works potential interpretations, this characteristic at the
same time negates any interpretation and, by causing
more ambiguity in the work, shows the shortcomings
of any attempt for unveiling the meaning.
In opposition to this characteristic of the work of
art, the interpretation tries to overcome the indeterminacy
of the works’ elements and make itself
clear and visible through unveiling the work’s
enigma, ambiguity, and absurdity. However, what
always remains absent in this negative dialectics is
the meaning of the work’s enigma.
Ali Salehi Farsani,
Volume 6, Issue 23 (9-2017)
Abstract
This paper would evaluate this hypothesis that Lyotard, while admitting the subjugating aspects of political modernity, still sees the aesthetic transgression of its dysfunctions and shortages possible. To better proceed with such evaluation, I need first to find components in his thought that are in harmony with political modernity and then to compare such components with his aesthetic approach. Lyotard does not perspicuously speak about political modernity; therefore, I should commence the argumentative process of this article by developing a model in the framework of which I can better illuminate his conception of the components of political modernity as well as his understanding of its shortcomings and subjugating aspects. This should be done by finding and sorting out of those components in his thought that are in harmony with political modernity. The hypothesis of this article is not tautological and is clearly against the prevailing interpretations that believe in the cultural transformation of aesthetics in the thought of Lyotard. Elaboration on Lyotard`s writings, along with the application of Lovejoy’s method of “history of ideas” in a conceptual framework that regards political modernity as the supremacy of right and self-determination to subjugation, leads us to the finding that Lyotard, believing in the supremacy of subjugation to right and self-determination in political modernity, is a critic of this situation. On the one hand, he regards political modernity and its extreme and totalitarian subjugation as an obstacle to the creation of avant-garde art, and on the other hand, he establishes a two-way correlation between this art and radical democracy, as an alternative to political modernity.
Mojtaba Golestani,
Volume 6, Issue 23 (9-2017)
Abstract
This essay deals with a question concerning the relation between plagiarism and the author function in the discourse of literature. Author function is a term used by French philosopher, Michel Foucault (1926-1984) to analyze the notion of author and its formation within the discourse of literature. This paper would consider plagiarism according to the author function, maintaining this assumption that a discourse named literature belongs to modern age and is formed in the framework of modernity. Plagiarism, in this sense, is an economic category and we can study archaeology of plagiarism and its relation to ownership of property. As a result, whenever there is ownership it is meaningful to be plagiarized. Therefore, we investigate notions of plagiarism, discourse of literature and author function respectively in order to study archaeology of the function of plagiarism as an economic metaphor within episteme of modernity, regardless to any value judgment.
|
|
