Performance Is The Thing

[Philosophy Now]

Dzifa Benson is compelled to consider the nature of performance.

https://philosophynow.org/issues/57/Performance_Is_The_Thing

[Nick_A]

Dzifa Benson wrote:

Can I be so bold as to state that Socrates/Plato missed a trick in The Republic by espousing the idea that poetry (and by extension, performance) had dire consequences for the proper governance of an ideal state and should therefore be banished from any decent society? Poetry, currently the dominant medium of my own performances, was revered in ancient Greece as the authoritative expression of sacred myth, tradition and wisdom. Even though poetry today is a relatively marginal topic for philosophy, it was crucial for philosophy’s own initial self-definition. Poetry came from and appealed to the emotional aspects of human nature, but with Plato, philosophy distinguished itself from poetry as a new, superior knowledge which could provide better guidance for life, and even superior pleasure. This is where I part ways with him. He believed that “ideals [Forms] belong in a world that only the wise man can understand” ­– making the philosopher the only type of person fit to govern others. Poetry, art, performance did not conform to the ideal of a perfect republic led by philosophers. To my mind this is placing undue emphasis on the rational (intellectual) over the irrational (emotional). It also supposes the end product, the thing – an ideal, non-democratic state – to be of superior value to the process. Process awareness would encourage a state that is in perpetual evolution; a living breathing state that therefore cannot ever reach an unchanging ideal.

Simone Weil wrote

“Art has no immediate future because all art is collective and there is no more collective life(there are only dead collections of people), and also because of this breaking of the true pact between the body and the soul. Greek art coincided with the beginning of geometry and with athleticism, the art of the Middle Ages with the craftsmen's guilds, the art of the Renaissance with the beginning of mechanics, etc....Since 1914 there has been a complete cut. Even comedy is almost impossible. There is only room for satire (when was it easier to understand Juvenal?). Art will never be reborn except from amidst a general anarchy - it will be epic no doubt, because affliction will have simplified a great many things...It is therefore quite useless for you to envy Leonardo or Bach. Greatness in our times must take a different course. Moreover it can only be solitary, obscure and without an echo...(but without an echo, no art).” ― Simone Weil, Gravity and Grace

Dzifa Benson raises an interesting question. As a medium for pondering essential truths, should the emotions as in poetry guide the mind or should the mind guide the emotions?

According to Simone, art as described by Plato connecting body and soul doesn't exist in the modern world so by default the question is now just academic. The subjective value of art is decided by institutions like Sotheby's. But if the objective value of art has been lost, the subjective value decided by auctions in Sotheby's is all we have.

[Nick_A]

Dzifa Benson wrote:

Can I be so bold as to state that Socrates/Plato missed a trick in The Republic by espousing the idea that poetry (and by extension, performance) had dire consequences for the proper governance of an ideal state and should therefore be banished from any decent society? Poetry, currently the dominant medium of my own performances, was revered in ancient Greece as the authoritative expression of sacred myth, tradition and wisdom. Even though poetry today is a relatively marginal topic for philosophy, it was crucial for philosophy’s own initial self-definition. Poetry came from and appealed to the emotional aspects of human nature, but with Plato, philosophy distinguished itself from poetry as a new, superior knowledge which could provide better guidance for life, and even superior pleasure. This is where I part ways with him. He believed that “ideals [Forms] belong in a world that only the wise man can understand” ­– making the philosopher the only type of person fit to govern others. Poetry, art, performance did not conform to the ideal of a perfect republic led by philosophers. To my mind this is placing undue emphasis on the rational (intellectual) over the irrational (emotional). It also supposes the end product, the thing – an ideal, non-democratic state – to be of superior value to the process. Process awareness would encourage a state that is in perpetual evolution; a living breathing state that therefore cannot ever reach an unchanging ideal.

Simone Weil wrote

“Art has no immediate future because all art is collective and there is no more collective life(there are only dead collections of people), and also because of this breaking of the true pact between the body and the soul. Greek art coincided with the beginning of geometry and with athleticism, the art of the Middle Ages with the craftsmen's guilds, the art of the Renaissance with the beginning of mechanics, etc....Since 1914 there has been a complete cut. Even comedy is almost impossible. There is only room for satire (when was it easier to understand Juvenal?). Art will never be reborn except from amidst a general anarchy - it will be epic no doubt, because affliction will have simplified a great many things...It is therefore quite useless for you to envy Leonardo or Bach. Greatness in our times must take a different course. Moreover it can only be solitary, obscure and without an echo...(but without an echo, no art).” ― Simone Weil, Gravity and Grace

Dzifa Benson raises an interesting question. As a medium for pondering essential truths, should the emotions as in poetry guide the mind or should the mind guide the emotions?

According to Simone, art as described by Plato connecting body and soul doesn't exist in the modern world so by default the question is now just academic. The subjective value of art is decided by institutions like Sotheby's. But if the objective value of art has been lost, the subjective value decided by auctions in Sotheby's is all we have.

[Ansiktsburk]

Dzifa Benson wrote:

Can I be so bold as to state that Socrates/Plato missed a trick in The Republic by espousing the idea that poetry (and by extension, performance) had dire consequences for the proper governance of an ideal state and should therefore be banished from any decent society? Poetry, currently the dominant medium of my own performances, was revered in ancient Greece as the authoritative expression of sacred myth, tradition and wisdom. Even though poetry today is a relatively marginal topic for philosophy, it was crucial for philosophy’s own initial self-definition. Poetry came from and appealed to the emotional aspects of human nature, but with Plato, philosophy distinguished itself from poetry as a new, superior knowledge which could provide better guidance for life, and even superior pleasure. This is where I part ways with him. He believed that “ideals [Forms] belong in a world that only the wise man can understand” ­– making the philosopher the only type of person fit to govern others. Poetry, art, performance did not conform to the ideal of a perfect republic led by philosophers. To my mind this is placing undue emphasis on the rational (intellectual) over the irrational (emotional). It also supposes the end product, the thing – an ideal, non-democratic state – to be of superior value to the process. Process awareness would encourage a state that is in perpetual evolution; a living breathing state that therefore cannot ever reach an unchanging ideal.

Simone Weil wrote

“Art has no immediate future because all art is collective and there is no more collective life(there are only dead collections of people), and also because of this breaking of the true pact between the body and the soul. Greek art coincided with the beginning of geometry and with athleticism, the art of the Middle Ages with the craftsmen's guilds, the art of the Renaissance with the beginning of mechanics, etc....Since 1914 there has been a complete cut. Even comedy is almost impossible. There is only room for satire (when was it easier to understand Juvenal?). Art will never be reborn except from amidst a general anarchy - it will be epic no doubt, because affliction will have simplified a great many things...It is therefore quite useless for you to envy Leonardo or Bach. Greatness in our times must take a different course. Moreover it can only be solitary, obscure and without an echo...(but without an echo, no art).” ― Simone Weil, Gravity and Grace

Dzifa Benson raises an interesting question. As a medium for pondering essential truths, should the emotions as in poetry guide the mind or should the mind guide the emotions?

According to Simone, art as described by Plato connecting body and soul doesn't exist in the modern world so by default the question is now just academic. The subjective value of art is decided by institutions like Sotheby's. But if the objective value of art has been lost, the subjective value decided by auctions in Sotheby's is all we have.

Well, paintings is one thing, poetry another. You cannot buy poems on Sotheby. Even though I rhyme all the time, being the father of many garage rock songs in Scandinavian long time ago, I cannot really dig Poetry. Prose is my thing. That being beside the point here - thing is the ”end products” are what have raised mean lifetime and reduced kids dying to a rarity rather than a commonality as well as having made our world a pretty comfy one. So well, if poetry can stimulate some hotshot brain to like discover some new clean source of energy, fine by me! Mind guiding the motions? That too. You cannot let the emotions run away with you. To say to oneself ”be creative” is kind of fruitless, but holding your horses is generally a good idea.

[Nick_A]

Ansiktsburk

Well, paintings is one thing, poetry another. You cannot buy poems on Sotheby. Even though I rhyme all the time, being the father of many garage rock songs in Scandinavian long time ago, I cannot really dig Poetry. Prose is my thing. That being beside the point here - thing is the ”end products” are what have raised mean lifetime and reduced kids dying to a rarity rather than a commonality as well as having made our world a pretty comfy one. So well, if poetry can stimulate some hotshot brain to like discover some new clean source of energy, fine by me! Mind guiding the motions? That too. You cannot let the emotions run away with you. To say to oneself ”be creative” is kind of fruitless, but holding your horses is generally a good idea.

IYO does performance art further awakening us to the relationship between body and soul or can it also further their division as Plato and Simone described? How can we experience the difference?