tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999089465199150217.post968918336977600101..comments2023-06-13T04:38:07.859-05:00Comments on High Concepts: Art and the Limits of InventionDaniel McInernyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17395718013706017328noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999089465199150217.post-74988881146346896042011-08-04T20:32:47.087-05:002011-08-04T20:32:47.087-05:00Thanks Tim and Matthew for these insightful though...Thanks Tim and Matthew for these insightful thoughts. I don't claim to have the definitive answer to your questions. I agree with Maritain and I think with both of you that the consummate artist in moments of "higher genius" will "conform to a higher rule and a hidden order." When writers, for example, play with non-linear plot (pick your example: Christopher Nolan's film Memento, James Joyce's Finnegan's Wake, etc.), they are "breaking" with traditional forms of plot construction, but also are arguably conforming to the basic principle that the point of the story is a human agent attempting to achieve some goal that either he/she will successfully achieve or not, and that it is ACCIDENTAL whether the attempt is depicted in chronological order. OK. But then there's Matthew's question: where is the line? how do we distinguish higher genius from clever mish-mash? We'd have to get down to cases, but I think in the passage Tim quotes Maritain lays down a useful principle: going "beyond" the rules, as it were, must in some sense be of service to the rule. Artistic inventiveness, in other words, must manifest a hidden order within the principle of the art--or else it fails to be true inventiveness. To clarify this line is what art criticism is all about.Daniel McInernyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17395718013706017328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999089465199150217.post-58738526275067423392011-07-31T12:47:22.951-05:002011-07-31T12:47:22.951-05:00Daniel and Tim - These quotes/insights clarify a l...Daniel and Tim - These quotes/insights clarify a lot - thanks for taking the time to explain.<br /><br />"Not against the rules, but outside or above them in conformity with a higher rule" seems to be key. Then again, as you say, there will be some difficulty in discerning when this is the case if this higher rule is hidden; for, surely, much of modern art (for anyone who has strolled through MOMA) is against most if not all rules to its own detriment - clearly lacking the habitus and genius of the artist, and not conforming to some higher and hidden order.Matthewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03836634127448740415noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999089465199150217.post-7145857298850789142011-07-30T08:19:32.334-05:002011-07-30T08:19:32.334-05:00I hit "submit" too quickly...
He goes ...I hit "submit" too quickly... <br /><br />He goes on to explain that in some "higher moments" of genius, the artist acts "not against the rules, but outside or above them, in conformity with a higher rule and a more hidden order."<br /><br />It seems to me that Maritain here concedes the subjective nature of art to the extent that there must be the possibility that we will sometimes have difficulty discerning between that which is not art and that which "conforms with the higher rule."<br /><br />But this also comes back to the idea (if I am understanding Maritain,) that the rule is for the art, not for the artist.<br /><br />As in your sports analogy, it's like those moments that we watch the great athletes drive to the basket, run through tacklers to the end zone, or make a spectacular double play, and we think "how on earth did he do that?"<br /><br />All the players follow the same "rules" in the game; some follow a higher order.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1999089465199150217.post-7825407674245146262011-07-30T08:08:53.072-05:002011-07-30T08:08:53.072-05:00And, as Maritain points out, "the artist is a...And, as Maritain points out, "the artist is a ruler who uses rules according to his ends; it is as senseless to conceive of him as the slave of the rules as to consider the worker the slave of his tools."Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com