论德勒兹在《普鲁斯特和符号》中的美学悖论
发布时间：2018-08-07 17:57
【摘要】：哲学文艺化是肇始于形而上学内部危机的一场当代文哲联姻,也是当代西方(特别是法国)理论和创作的一个大趋势。然而当哲学离开逻辑去文艺里寻找经验时,却出现了不可调和的美学悖论。以德勒兹的《普鲁斯特和符号》为例,在这一文艺到哲学的旅途中,德勒兹将推动哲学的原动力默认为是文艺创作的原动力,从而出现了不可调和的美学悖论。《普鲁斯特和符号》一方面给出了哲学在文艺作品中建构的全新视角,另一方面又因为文艺和哲学的相异性与不可通约性,无法抵达德勒兹给出的结论。
[Abstract]:Philosophical literature and art is a contemporary literary and philosophic marriage that originated in the internal crisis of metaphysics, and is also a big trend in Contemporary Western (especially France) theory and creation. However, when philosophy left logic to seek experience in literature and art, it appears irreconcilable aesthetic paradox. Taking Deleuze's < Proust and symbol > as an example, this is an example. During the journey of literature and art to philosophy, Deleuze defaults the motive force of philosophy as the motive force of literary and artistic creation, and thus appears an irreconcilable aesthetic paradox. On the one hand, < Proust and symbol > gives a new perspective on the construction of Philosophy in literary and artistic works, on the other hand, for the dissimilarity and incompatibility of literature and art and philosophy, It was impossible to reach the conclusion Deleuze gave.
【作者单位】： 南京师范大学文学院;
【分类号】：B83-0
[Abstract]:Philosophical literature and art is a contemporary literary and philosophic marriage that originated in the internal crisis of metaphysics, and is also a big trend in Contemporary Western (especially France) theory and creation. However, when philosophy left logic to seek experience in literature and art, it appears irreconcilable aesthetic paradox. Taking Deleuze's < Proust and symbol > as an example, this is an example. During the journey of literature and art to philosophy, Deleuze defaults the motive force of philosophy as the motive force of literary and artistic creation, and thus appears an irreconcilable aesthetic paradox. On the one hand, < Proust and symbol > gives a new perspective on the construction of Philosophy in literary and artistic works, on the other hand, for the dissimilarity and incompatibility of literature and art and philosophy, It was impossible to reach the conclusion Deleuze gave.
【作者单位】： 南京师范大学文学院;
【分类号】：B83-0
【共引文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 窦晓光;浅析邓小平关于时间的看法[J];安徽大学学报;2001年01期
2 李孟国;;海德格尔的“伦理”论题与存在之真理[J];安徽大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2008年03期
3 邓晓臻;;海德格尔的“此在”范畴——基于马克思文本的比较研究[J];安徽大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2008年03期
4 陈海燕;;谢林与海德格尔艺术观念之比较[J];安徽大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2009年03期
5 曾云;;源初境域和意义显示——海德格尔早期对“世界”的解释[J];安徽大学学报(哲学社会科学版);2012年02期
6 杜萌若;;王羲之的“影响的焦虑”与王羲之影响的焦虑[J];书画世界;2011年01期
7 齐国平;孟亚男;;“此在”与“共在”——中西文化交流的存在主义视角[J];保定师范专科学校学报;2005年04期
8 徐珂;;解构论形而上学与反形而上学的视阈[J];北方工业大学学报;2006年04期
9 于，
本文编号：2170868
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenyilunwen/meixuelunwen/2170868.html
