Hi Susanna
Good points. Just pulled out my old copy of Dr. Faustus. Do you recall
which chapter or which character represents Adorno? Strange that altho I am
aware of H and Arendt's intertwnied history, somehow I just never viewed
them as a couple. I'll get back after reading the chapter.
Regards
----- Original Message -----
From: "Susanna Chandler" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2003 5:16 PM
Subject: Re: being or not-being
> If H's sexual tensions are of interest, then a straight forward comparison
> of Hannah Arendt and her lover/mentor H would provide a solid set of
clues.
> Perhaps her *banality of evil* might even apply.
>
> I apologize to the forum for a rather attenuated presentation of music as
an
> example of ontology at work in art. Nonetheless, it is not irrelevant to
the
> discussion as to the progression from Monteverdi's extraordinary efforts
in
> effecting a conceptual / artistic system. That he ended up with a
Cartesian
> result is the problematic that an artist like Beethoven took up.
>
> Theodore Adorno's extensive work on Beethoven is extremely apropos. He
was,
> of course, a scholar of H., and expressed his philosophical education and
> individual concepts in his understanding of B's artistic life cycle.
Whereas
> we might endlessly discuss H's sandwiching of the metaphysical origins and
> futures around being-in-time, the trajectory of a great artists is perhaps
> the best example of what this might mean or not mean.
>
> I would urge anyone on this list to read Thomas Mann's chapter in Dr.
> Faustus which is a direct fictionalization of Theodore Adorno's famous
> lecture/performance on Beethoven's last sonata. It took place in the
Pacific
> Palisades [my bad re: Santa Monica]. Most of us are quite aware of
Adorno's
> transformative ideas regarding dialectics. My favorite is Dialectics of
> Enlightenment, because I studied the French Enlightenment no doubt.
> Regardless, the metamorphosis from passion into
> convention/language/structure. Then moving into a manifest conjuring of a
> being/beings first walking then almost transgressing the phenomena of life
> being pulled into death / stillness; movement into quiet, the tensions
> between. It's true. It is there.
>
> Heidegger was nearly on the mark in his belief that art could express the
> full being of the metaphysical mingled with pure being-in-the-world. Where
H
> went wrong was indeed, as Richard pointed out, that the causality between
> origins and ontology simply do not exist any longer [if ever]. And this
> proved dangerous to the extreme. In Beethoven's Ode To Spring the
heightened
> possibility of collective experience of transformation in being other
could
> be achieved, much in the same manner as N's Birth of Tragedy. By the time
> Beethoven had reached beyond maturity into wisdom of age in his last works
> he portrayed a lightness and heaviness of being, pure embodiment of being,
> much as Nietzche came to do with thought. It is not beside the point that
> Beethoven was deaf, essentially expressing his ideas without measuring
this
> against physical affirmation. Similar to ontology without naming. Beyond
> naming.
>
> This is not trivial nor am I attempting to be wild eyed or inventive.
> Certainly I apologize if belaboring my ideas.
>
> best, Susanna
>
|