Luciano Duarte | Literature and philosophy

What is art?, by Leo Tolstoy

Very interesting essay, as always, in the case of this plume. To Tolstoy, the work of art is a means of transmitting feelings, that is to say: regardless of the qualitative character of the feeling expressed,—which can be good, bad, strong, weak…—the artistic work fulfills its role as long as this feeling communicated by the artist is experienced by those who come in contact with it. And the master, without evasions, carries out the consequences of this proposition, judging the various aesthetic theories over time and citing numerous artists as examples of great, bad, true, and false art. Essentially, he says, art is not a search for “beauty”,—nor any other abstraction,—but an instrument that enables the artist to transmit that which extrapolates the rational argument, to transmit personal feelings experienced by the author. Art, thus, establishes a link between the artist and the common man, justifying its noble role in society since it allows anyone to have experiences that would not be possible by any other means. Tolstoy also judges the art of his time mostly corrupted and risks some comments about the “art of the future”. The essay dates from 1898, the master passed away in 1910: he spared himself from witnessing how unfortunately all his predictions would fall by the wayside…

____________

No to the Linguistic Cheating!

I read a hundred pages of Heidegger and throw the volume into space. Unbearable! A hundred sterile pages wrapped in the most abstract language of the universe, a hundred pages of rhetoric that seems deep, but clouds the thought, deceives by pretending to approach the last truths by being nothing but hollow and evasive. Terrible, terrible… But how pleasant it was to interrupt the linguistic cheating! to say no to the falsification of philosophy! Forgive me, idolaters, but I only see value in philosophy useful to someone who, in desperation, puts the barrel of a gun against a temple. Although, in truth, one Heidegger page is enough for anyone to pull the trigger…

____________

The Construction of a Logical Monument

I smile as I perceive my disgust with philosophical systems. The construction of a logical monument; the framing of reality, in all its infinite nuances, in a rational system: none of this arouses my interest, all this seems to me to come from a primary error. The construction of a philosophical system requires the mutilation of reality: its applicability in the real world, in practical life, is almost null. What is left beyond the system? Is there anything capable of impacting a conduct, altering a relationship between an individual and a medium, shaping a real posture? This is what I ask myself when I judge the work of a philosopher, and I smile when I see my inability to embark on the delirium and consider as wonderful that which is only applicable in the world of abstractions. The good philosophy must be able to see the jail, the madhouse, the monastery, and the whorehouse.

____________

Dostoevsky and the Artistic Technique

Proverbials are criticisms of Dostoevsky’s style. Not only the Russians but also those who do not know the language usually say Dostoevsky is prolix, imprecise and many other things, taxing his texts as badly written or badly finished. Of these, however, most recognize the immense value of Dostoevsky’s work, which raises an interesting question. Hemingway, in A Moveable Feast, puts it in the following terms: “How can a man write so badly, so unbelievably badly, and make you feel so deeply?” The answer is simple: what is in Dostoevsky’s work goes beyond the artistic technique. On this one, I keep the numerous caveats to the so unbelievably badly for when I am able to read in Russian—caution, by the way, that Hemingway did not have. But the question exposes another even more interesting: what is the purpose of art? how does great art manifest itself? And the critics who judge the essence of art to reside in technique are wrong. Great art stands out, primarily, for the power of expression, for the effect it is capable of generating. And style, technique, form are accessories that contribute to the creation of this effect, many times amplifying the expressiveness of the artistic work. Different intentions, different techniques… And distinguishing the essential, it is possible to understand how authors of styles as disparate as Hemingway and Dostoevsky manage, both, to deliver us works of enormous value.

____________