8/13/2019 Feeling and Form

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/feeling-and-form 1/1

Continued from   page 3)

  of  genius-one  of the  most  awesome  literary performances  I

  ever  witnessed),  an d   Charles G.  Finney's perplexing  Circus  o f Lao, which, like  Ross  Lockridge's epic, poetic Rain tree County,

  been stolen  f rom   many potential readers by the simple device of

  wretched, worthless  film   adaptations of them. In the case

f  Lockridge  this bit of bad  p.r.  is particularly tragic, because one

f  the most important of his many achievements in his much-mis-

only novel was the integration of the technical devices of

  writers like James Joyce with the traditional devices ofand character writing which have proved of greatest continuing

  for  most  readers-Lockridge  succeeded  in  combining  a

  story with some of the most sophisticated narrative tricks

  have developed  in  their  quest  for  ever more precise

I  shall not, by the way, recommend the work of James Joyce,

  I  consider  it  beyond question that  he is the  most brilliant

  of the  past century,  and  possible  of the  past  five-

  little pleasure in reading  Ulysses  (or even A  Portrait  of the

  a s a  Young  M a n  o r  Dubliners),  except  o f a   raref ied,  cerebral

ut very real and very intense) sort available only to those preoccu-

ith literary style. This is why (and every Joyce enthusiast

FEELING   AND   FORM

knows this, though none will own up) reading good criticism o

Joyce's work  is  just  as  much  fun as  reading Joyce  himself .  It

novels like  Raintree  County  and  like Samuel  R.  Delany's  rece

Dhalgren  which vindicate Joyce  by  proving his  methods  u sefu l an actual imaginative context.

The  period  we are all living  in has seen  the  rise  to  excellence  of

number  o f   f irst-rate  novelists  (William H. Gass   with  Omensetter

Luck,  Anthony Burgess with  A  Clockwork Orange,  Al f red   Best

with  The Stars My  Destination,  J.D. Salinger with  The Catcher

the Rye,  Ray Bradbury with Dandelion Wine, Ross  MacDona ld wi

any of the later Lew Archer novels, Edgar Pangborn with  A  Mirrfor  Observers,  there  are  many others)  of whom  I think  the  most im

portant are  Ayn Rand (principally  for Atlas Shrugged-ihe  story

what  happens  when  the men of the  mind  go on  strike),  Vladim

N a bo ko v  (principally  for Pale Fire-the story of a literary artist wh

though  this  is not a  fantasy, literally  becomes unuable to distin

uish between  his  work  and  reality),  and  Mervyn  Peake (principal

fo r  the Gormenghast  Tr iology-TYftw   Groan, Gormenghast, and  Tit

Alone— the story of how and why it is necessary for any individuof  creative  intelligence-for  any individual at  all-to break  free  

imposed systems like  the  State).  (Next  month:  Neil  McCaffr

brings us  Part  III of  Jazz:  Th e  Golden Age. Jeff  Riggenbach  rturns  in February  with ajjjscussion  o

By  Susanne

In  1914, well over  2000  years  af ter  Plato undertook the  f irst

  Clive  Bell declared that it is

  that  more nonsense  has  been written about aesthetics

n about anything else: the literature of the subject is not large

 that. Nearly 50 years later, Ayn Rand could still lament

  While  physics has  reached  the  level where  men are  able  to

  little  or nothing

out its nature, its function in human  l ife   or the cause of

 tremendous psychological power.Bu t  is the record of those  2400  years really so barren? Are we

  no  closer  to the  truth about  art  than  we  were when Plato

  writing about  it in the  lonl  The  f ac t  is, the  record  is not

 totally  barren  one: a  good deal  is known  and on record about  the

  and  articles  are  scattered  far and  wide. Man y  of them are out

f print, and a number of the others are so obscure that not even an

  can be  counted upon to have them all. More-

  literature of the subject is large enough that even an active

working in the  f ield,  like Bell or Rand, would be hard-

  keep  up  with  all of it; they could easily have missed works

 their gloomy  views  of the situation.  _=«._And for  the~general reader  ̂things  ar e  even'worseTSurely'it  is un-  

  to  expect  him to  read his way  through Kant, Coleridge,

  H u l m e ,  Pound,  D.G.  James, George Moore, Ransom, Hos-

  Beardsley, Gass, William J. Handy,  Ma r cus Hester,  and

and  (to  mention only  the  most significant writers  in  literary

  sift  the valuable ideas out of their books and work

tegration of these valuable ideas into some kind of coher-

nt theory of art. Even having done so, he would lack necessary

bout the other primary and performing arts, and he

would  still  have ahead of him a fascinating body of knowledge,

compiled mostly  by  logicians, psychological theorists,  and  philo-

sophers  of  science, pertaining  to the  logical  and psycho-epistemo-

 methods appropriate  to the  appreciation  of art. Altogether  it

s a formidable job.But how is the general reader to  avoid it if he wants to get the  most

out of the art he exposes himself to? The point of contemplating

artworks,  a f ter  all, is the enjoyment we hope to gain  f r om   the ex-

perience.  And the  capacity  to  appreciate works  of art  (that  is, to

grasp  their import)  is  ful ly   as latent  in the  healthy human mind as

the capacity to perceive entities or to form and manipulate concepts.

Bu t  like these latter  two  capacities,  it  does not  function automati-cally. We are not born knowing how to appreciate art any more thanwe  are born knowing how to perceive or how to think  conceptually.

K Langer

W e  have to learn to do each of these things. And the nonspecial

who nevertheless wants to burn with Pater's hard gem-like  f l a m

allowing  art to  give   the  highest quality  to his moments as they pa

needs  the  facts   in order to know how to use his mind most  e ffe

tively in pursuit of that purpose. To my knowledge there is only o

philosopher  or  critic  who has presented  in one book  the basic inf

mation a person needs to develop his capacity for art appreciatio

The philosopher is Susanne K. Langer. The book,   first  publish

more than twenty years ago, is Feeling  and  Form: A  Theory  of A

Developed from Philosophy  in a New  Key.

Feeling  and  Form  elaborates  the  theory  that  a  work  of art ispresentational symbol of human feeling.  Feeling is used here

a  very broad sense, as roughly synonymous with  experience  awareness. A work of art is a symbol  of human feeling, Lang

argues,  because it concretizes and objectifies a concept  of some kiof  human experience. And the various branches of art are dist

guishable  f r om   one another hi terms of the kinds of conceiv

feelings  they symbolize. Thus the visual arts symbolize hum

experience of scene (in painting), kinetic volume (in sculpture) an

ethnic domain  (in  architecture). Music symbolizes human feeling 

temporal motion; literature, human  feeling   of  past events or meory; drama, human experience of destiny through a sequence

,  tin?  X rafiVeT(WhiCli Eafrgjei

argues is a primary art), human feeling of bodily power, and so o

She also includes a brief appendix on the art of film-making, sketc

ing the reasons for her view that  f i lms   are not simply dramas p

served for  later presentation,  but constitute instead a fundamenta

ne w art f o r m .The chapters on the dance, on music, and on drama are amon

the most important and among the most  filled  with brilliant insigh

What  are the  factors  that  d if ferentiate  a  technically  per fect  b

artistically  f l awed   performance  of a  musical work  f r om   an  arti

cally successful but technically ordinary performance of the sam

piece? What is the  d if ference  between the creativity of the compoand  the  creativity  of the  performing artist?  Is the  dance  stilprimary art when is is set to music, as in ballet?  W h a t are trage

and comedy, and what is their relation to drama? There are answ

to all these questions,  and the  answers are  related back  to the ba

theory and shown, in each case, to be special instances of it.

Langer  points out,  a  true  general theory  has no  exceptions,  awhen it seems to have them it is not properly stated. And it may

suff icient ,  to distinguish Langer's own general theory  f r om   ev

other I have encountered in the  field   of aesthetics, to say thatseems  to  have  no  exceptions. Reviewed  by  Jeff   RiggenbachPhilosophy / Scribner's, 1953,  out of print  / $2.65

LICENSED TO UNZ.ORG

ELECTRONIC REPRODUCTION PROHIBITED