Il y a instruction. WEIL, op. WEIL, idem , p. To address the question of the action of art, I shall begin by looking at the concept of decreation as put forward by Simone Weil. I quote:. Destruction: to make something created pass into nothingness. A blameworthy substitute for decreation. We shall explore the nature of this concept so as to relate it to art and its contemporary modalities through the digital and the Internet, with copyleft as its driving force.
This act is the creation of a passage rather than of a tangible object; or to be more precise, the act renders a tangible object -since the intention is not to deny the object as it is- one that takes a tangent, changes, in which something occurs that exceeds its contours. It is not an end point; it is a starting point. The created object is unstable in its completion. It is evolving towards its completion; its way of being is a possible infinity. Simone Weil ponders the ethical quality of our actions and our creations. Which way is right, and which action? What is doing right, doing good, doing best what can be done?
What is clear to us is that decreation is not destruction, which makes the created pass into nothingness. Decreation makes the created pass into the uncreated. It is its infinite future, into infinity.
- The Third Terrace of Purgatory: Redemption?
- Diane Lamoureux - Wikipedia.
One might argue that the uncreated is a mode of the created, when not fixed in what seems to be its completion, its final stage. Such a completion could be formally satisfactory in esthetic terms, but unsatisfactory in terms of art, which cannot content itself with formalism alone. For if esthetics is that which is perceived by the senses, it cannot halt at the surface of the perceptible.
More Books by Lucille Beaudry & Lawrence Olivier
The surface of the skin, of the retina; all our surfaces that act as interfaces between us and all that we come into contact with. Esthetics is a vehicle of perception for grasping the imperceptible and, in this way, opening up to that which goes beyond the formalism of a form fixed solely in its external appearance. Es-ethics is an intimate and unstable awareness of this dimension which, not halting at the surface of the senses — common-sense included — dives into the skin of an object, its corpus, its substance, to access its heart — its central core — which is the engine for real action.
A negation of what might exist beyond the image; negation of the possibility of a passage from the created to uncreated. To halt at the surface is to not recognize that the skin is not an end in itself, but rather the visible interface of the soul. The most mortal thing in the world! Only the soul is immortal, alas!
But what does the soul count for now? Everything is made of human skin. Men no longer fight for honor, freedom and justice. They fight for their skins […] 5. Only the infinite limits the limitless. The infinite is not unlimited. Via the infinite, decreation seeks to confine our unbounded fascination with evil, to limit the unlimited, which gives end to everything.
Evil is licence and that is why it is monotonous: everything has to be drawn from ourselves. But it is not given to man to create, so it is a bad attempt to imitate God. Not to recognize and accept this impossibility of creating is the source of many an error. We are obliged to imitate the act of creation, and there are two possible imitations—the one real and the other apparent—preserving and destroying. There is in that of destroying. Hence when I create, I in fact merely imitate the act of creating.
This chaotic gap of the original creation condemns to failure all tangible attempts at human creation as man cannot, in seeking to create, do other than destroy the movement of creation in which he is immersed. May I disappear in order that those things that I see may become perfect in their beauty from the very fact that they are no longer things that I see. When I am in any place, I disturb the silence of heaven and earth by my breathing and the beating of my heart.
This withdrawal from creation does not signify a negation of human agency. It takes part in Creation. Let us consider how the digital and the Internet are in keeping with the process of decreation. The work exists, and we are the workers. Yet, we must concede that this constitutes an act of faith in the art acheivable. It establishes the procedural reality of what is at work today, without accepting the market as sole criteria for attributing a value to art. We are neither idle, nor are we the masters of works.
We are put to work by decreation that passes through technical means, and by a reality that has materialized and become popularised through the digital and its reticular way of transporting. Man will only rise above earthly things if a powerful equipment supplies him with the requisite fulcrum. He must use matter as a support if he wants to get away from matter. In other words, the mystical summons up the mechanical […]. We must add that the body, now larger, calls for a bigger soul, and that mechanism should mean mysticism.
The origins of the process of mechanization are indeed more mystical than we might imagine. Machinery will find its true vocation again, it will render services in proportion to its power, only if mankind, which it has bowed still lower to the earth, can succeed, through it, in standing erect and looking heavenwards. Let us look, then, to this new sky: the new, immaterial and infinite space that is the Internet, in order to examine its living nature and the objects found within it.
We thereby distinguish a principle of creation associated with decreation: copyleft. It entitles users to study, copy, share and modify software creations, and comes with a fundamental obligation to keep these four rights intact. Let us take a prime example of a free, copyleft software from among the most renowned: the operating system Linux. It is of particular interest to us for in it was awarded the first prize, in the Internet category, at the Ars Electronica digital art festival 22 and was recognized as a work of art.
For the first time in the history of art, an operating mechanism and piece of software, an object not created by an artist recognised as such, was considered a work of art. To deny the existence of art at work would be to equate the making of objects to a process of creation when in fact, the Internet and the digital are based on an act of decreation. Neither creation, nor destruction, but infinite making that is eternally ending: moving objects adjusted to the very movement of their period of existence, through the cycle of updates.
Wikipedia 23 is another good example of what can be identified as decreation at work. In this free, copyleft-licenced encyclopedia CC BY-SA 24 , there is no creation rather, the gathering of the fruits of existing knowledge , nor destruction acts of vandalism are quickly dealt with, and erroneous information swiftly corrected. It is instructive. It is viewed and expanded by invention 25 , and the state of the world. After becoming aware of the process of free software creation, and enthused by the ethics behind copyleft, in I organised a discussion cycle with members of the art and free software worlds to ascertain if copyleft could be applied to objects other than just software.
In the July, with the help of legal experts, the Free Art License was drawn up. The following is an extract from its preamble:. The Free Art License recognizes and protects these rights. Their implementation has been reformulated in order to allow everyone to use creations of the human mind in a creative manner, regardless of their types and ways of expression […] The main rationale for this Free Art License is to promote and protect these creations of the human mind according to the principles of copyleft: freedom to use, copy, distribute, transform, and prohibition of exclusive appropriation.
Is it simply a question of transmitting the possibility of an art, to bring up to date the traditions that are today becoming set in their ways. This intangible heritage can be an expression of identity for a human community. In its fullest sense, tradition is both memory and intention, a collective conscience; a memory of what was, with the duty to transmit and enrich it.
If I desire that this world should exist — this world in which I am but an atom — then I become a co-creator. A rational creature is one that contains within itself the germ, the principle, the vocation of decreation. Selected quotes taken from the following English translations of the works cited by the author:. Routledge Classics, The Skin. Pickle Partners Publishing, West, Martin Litchfield, ed. Theogony and Works and days. General provisions. Un voyage se passe de motifs. Et donc.
Mais les spectateurs regardent et ne font rien. Husson et G. Badia, Paris, Editions sociales, , p. HENRY, op. MARX, idem , tome I, p. HENRY, idem , p.
Nietzsche, pensatore della politica, pensatore del sociale? by Edizioni ETS - Issuu
MARX, i dem , p. HENRY, idem p. Granger, Paris, Gallimard, , p. AUDI, Idem , p. Commentaire de M. Quelques dates significatives. La naissance des auteurs. Un sujet libre. La Biennale de Paris. Quel commun aux avant-gardes? Le calcul des machines. Le logiciel libre copyleft.
La General Public License. Le fait politique du libre, des effets politiques? Des logiciels et des hommes libres. Des logiciels libres 1. The Gimp. Des logiciels libres pour tous usages. Des associations. Des GUL. Le sentiment religieux. Le Mal est-il un absolu? Dans cette optique, on admettra avec G. Les auteurs se fixent donc deux objectifs. Van Fraassen, qui est docteur honoris causa de la K. Paris, Les Plans, Parole et Silence, On ne saurait se passer du capitalisme.
Pour faire les affaires, il faut faire confiance. Or la confiance est une notion purement morale. La confiance est aussi importante pour les entre- prises que pour les individus. Decomposition and Localization as Strategies in Scientific Research. Cambridge Mass. Essai sur les fondements de la praxis philosophique. ISBN: De la question du vide de notre vie ou du rien de notre existence, on peut en effet ne pas se remettre. Il y a certes un bon dogmatisme.
Le livre de M. Bacon, L. Freud etc. Tourpe et E. Dans cette partie programmatique, E. Oster, Person und Transsubstantiation. Philosophie contemporaine demain. Anthologie de textes fondamentaux. Paris, Hermann, Comment sortir de cette ambivalence? Paris, Vuibert, La contribution de T.
L’épistémologie du sens commun
Menzies et C. La contribution de P. Travaux et recherches. Dans ce contexte, un couteau qui ne tranche pas, ou qui tranche mal, est un couteau qui ne fonctionne pas, ou qui fonctionne mal. Diffusion : www. Nous y reviendrons. Avant toute chose, une double mise au point historique est souhaitable. Nous ne rejetons pas les notes en fin de texte afin de rendre la lecture plus souple.
De qui donc, mon Dieu, suis-je ainsi le spec- tateur? Combien suis-je? Qui est moi? Je ne suis personne, personne. Russell, Carnap et Quine cons- truisent pour leur part le monde logiquement. Si elle parle de tout voire du Tout , peut-elle vraiment dire quelque chose de concret? Qui sont les amis?
- Publisher Description?
- L’utopie est réelle, la réalité est utopique..
- Shakk – De la révolte à la guerre en Syrie : conflits, déplacements, incertitudes.
- Nuevo Diccionario Inglés-Español ANGLOS v.4.0 (Versión 2015) (Spanish Edition).
- Lisola del tesoro (Primi classici per i più piccoli) (Italian Edition).
Or, que se passe-t-il dans les faits? Qui en rit? Mais c'est tout. I, Prose. Seul ce noyau importe, ses vicissitu- des sont contingentes, accidentelles, sans importance fondamentale. Livre I, ch. Whitehead, W. James et P. The modern scientific age then gradually supervenes, and again in William James we find the typical imaginative scholar.
Related Politique par le détour de lart, de léthique et de la philosophie (French Edition)
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved