We're sorry. An error has occurred
Please cancel or retry.
The Thing and Art
Regular price
$68.00
Regular price
$68.00
Sale price
$68.00
Unit price
/
per
Sold out
Re-stocking soon
On the grounds of the interpretation of Rainer Maria Rilke’s poetry and Paul Cézanne’s paintings the book attempts to approach the work of art as a thing. This lets to overcome a one-sided aestheti...
Read More
Some error occured while loading the Quick View. Please close the Quick View and try reloading the page.
Couldn't load pickup availability
Ships within 2 business days
-
01 January 2009

On the grounds of the interpretation of Rainer Maria Rilke’s poetry and Paul Cézanne’s paintings the book attempts to approach the work of art as a thing. This lets to overcome a one-sided aesthetical interpretation of the origin of the work of art and to indicate its place in the cosmos of uncreated, i.e. not hominized things. So, the second fundamental issue raised is a try to point out a metaphysical difference between a hominized and not hominized (natural) thing. Such a non-aesthetical point of view is called ontotopy by the author and is opposed to traditional ontology and the philosophy of art.
Price: $68.00
Pages: 155
Publisher: Brill
Imprint: Brill
Series: On the Boundary of Two Worlds
Publication Date:
01 January 2009
ISBN: 9789042025646
Format: Paperback
”The publication of Arvydas Sliogeris’s The Thing and Art: Two Essays on the Ontotopy of the Work of Art is an important event. A central figure in Lithuanian philosophy, Sliogeris’s work makes its appearance in the series edited by Leonidas Donskis, ‘‘On the Boundary of Two Worlds: Identity, Freedom, and Moral Imagination in the Baltics.’’ It is a work that can be singled out for the brilliance of his style, as well as for the philosophical preoccupations that would, on the surface, define it as’’ postmodernist. ‘‘Yet a profound conservatism inspires Sliogeris’s work, which is at odds with postmodernist critiques of origins and universalism. Still, in one sense, he shares the contemporary preoccupation with the development of a non-aesthetical philosophy of art.” in: The European Legacy, Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 827–829, 2012