FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3006873869> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3006873869 endingPage "30" @default.
• W3006873869 startingPage "10" @default.
• W3006873869 abstract "Abstract The paper is based on the assumption that modern art centralises aesthetic experience in a specific way, why it as well be may regarded – in contrast to the rather forced interpretation of art already opposed by Susan Sontag (Sontag 2001, 10) – as an appropriate mode for encountering art. However, the theoretical discourse on aesthetic experience is characterised by opposite poles, which will be examined in the first part of this paper. On the one hand, there is the utopian conception around 1800, in which the reflection on aesthetic experience originally is rooted, in Friedrich Schiller’s On the Aesthetic Education of Man (cf. Noetzel 2006, 198) or Friedrich Schlegel’s imaginations of a life in art in Lucinde (cf. Dziudzia 2015, 38sqq.). On the other hand, the reflections in the German discourse at the beginning of the 20th century are marked in a conspicuously negative way, which can still be seen until the 1980s. In the theoretical first part of the essay, a few cursory positions on the ›problem of the aesthetic human being‹ will be considered initially, which reject aesthetic views in everyday life and evaluate such tendencies as forms of social decay. Concerned about morality on the surface, these positions indeed aim at criticising individual lifestyles in a modern world, which, in particular, are opposed to conservative and collectivist ideas of society and morality. These discourse positions, which are ultimately ideologically grounded, then lead to the deliberate reflections on aesthetic experience, as they unfold most notably from the 1970s onwards, where they form the implicit background. As will be shown, the explicitly negative evaluation expressed in the earlier positions then shapes the assessments of aesthetic experience of Hans-Robert Jauß (cf. Jauß 2007), Peter Bürger (cf. Bürger 1977) and Rüdiger Bubner (cf. Bubner 1989) as a fundamental, rather implicit scepticism. For the most part, their positions seem to make it impossible to think of the aesthetic experience as enrichment or to evaluate it positively, as is common in the US-American discourse, for instance. The latter stance, which is, in essence, initiated by John Dewey and his consciously non-strict separation between art and everyday life as well as his decidedly anti-elitist understanding of art and aesthetics, is more in keeping with the utopian concepts of around 1800. However, his writings only find late distribution in Germany (cf. Dewey 1980). In contrast to Dewey’s position – and Susan Sontag’s explicit rejection of the interpretation as a violent act and the omittance of the sensual experience of the artwork (Sontag 2001) – the critical condemnation of aesthetic experience, which ultimately remains unfounded in the German discourse (because of its implicit ideological origin), now appears challenged. In fact, attentive observation in an aesthetic stance becomes part of the aesthetic programme in modern art across the board (cf. Dziudzia 2015b). Bürger reflects on this and offers – especially in the examination of Marcel Proust In Search of Lost Time – a productive proposal to grasp the ›aestheticizing perception‹ (as he calls it) as a literary technique. In his conception, Bürger refers to media as a specific ›projection area‹ of aesthetic experience, especially in literature around 1900. The ›imaginary fadings‹ (cf. Schmitz-Emans 2001) in modern literature are, following Bürger, to be further thought of as ›exponentiated‹ aesthetic experiences, which find their form not only around 1900 but also in more recent literature. Therefore, in the second part of the paper and the exemplary reading of a contemporary German novel, Martin Mosebachs Der Mond und das Mädchen ( The Moon and the Maiden ), published in 2007, it is to be shown how aesthetic experience finds complex forms. In the specific shaping of imaginary fadings in the interplay of figure and narrator level, especially in recourse to the medium film to be observed therein, the ambivalence of the theoretical concept of aesthetic experience insinuates as will be argued." @default.
• W3006873869 created "2020-03-06" @default.
• W3006873869 creator A5091402610 @default.
• W3006873869 date "2020-02-28" @default.
• W3006873869 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W3006873869 title "Historisierung des Diskurses und Potenzierung ästhetischer Erfahrungen in der Literatur der (Post-)Moderne" @default.
• W3006873869 cites W2477163659 @default.
• W3006873869 cites W2952455645 @default.
• W3006873869 cites W2997808799 @default.
• W3006873869 cites W3214107743 @default.
• W3006873869 doi "https://doi.org/10.1515/jlt-2020-0002" @default.
• W3006873869 hasPublicationYear "2020" @default.
• W3006873869 type Work @default.
• W3006873869 sameAs 3006873869 @default.
• W3006873869 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W3006873869 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3006873869 hasAuthorship W3006873869A5091402610 @default.
• W3006873869 hasBestOaLocation W30068738691 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C107038049 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C111472728 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C138885662 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C154775046 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C158071213 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C200113983 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C2779018934 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C2983793060 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C41895202 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C527412718 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConcept C94625758 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C107038049 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C111472728 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C138885662 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C144024400 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C154775046 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C158071213 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C17744445 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C199539241 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C200113983 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C2779018934 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C2983793060 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C41895202 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C527412718 @default.
• W3006873869 hasConceptScore W3006873869C94625758 @default.
• W3006873869 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W3006873869 hasLocation W30068738691 @default.
• W3006873869 hasOpenAccess W3006873869 @default.
• W3006873869 hasPrimaryLocation W30068738691 @default.
• W3006873869 hasRelatedWork W1533505678 @default.
• W3006873869 hasRelatedWork W2003378975 @default.
• W3006873869 hasRelatedWork W2016780701 @default.
• W3006873869 hasRelatedWork W2037913085 @default.
• W3006873869 hasRelatedWork W2350132936 @default.
• W3006873869 hasRelatedWork W2366792386 @default.
• W3006873869 hasRelatedWork W2736532099 @default.
• W3006873869 hasRelatedWork W2828360937 @default.
• W3006873869 hasRelatedWork W4230710396 @default.
• W3006873869 hasRelatedWork W784216279 @default.
• W3006873869 hasVolume "14" @default.
• W3006873869 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3006873869 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3006873869 magId "3006873869" @default.
• W3006873869 workType "article" @default.