art divides people.
Schiller
kitsch makes him quite at his - and liked it.
Before the start of the modern in the romance, there was no difference between art and kitsch. There was only successful and less successful works, managed by the spent craftsmanship and is managed by the prevailing taste. The taste might be more or less formed - but then let alone distinguish a good from a bad taste.
Only when the people, namely the modern people consider their discord with himself as its discontinued provision began, could be distinguished by the works provocative and after reconciling .
The quarreled with the man is the reflective man - that gifted with free will of sovereign bourgeois subject who sees a world made over, not knowing what it has lost there . Whoever of the impositions of a disunited existence quietness will resort to the atoning work of the artists. Whenever a fact can be a habit, a man Kitsch is born.
Not too much beauty makes the difference. But it is a beauty, in which a well is just, and a beauty that brings one beside himself, and that can a Dvorak symphony and a sunset.
Where the self is like is kitsch, and where the overwhelming Andre is art.
PS . Schiller's distinction between Hooking and melting beauty means something else, but perhaps not quite something else?
0 comments:
Post a Comment