Stay, moment, you are terrible: reinventing the philosophy of tragedy

{"title":"Stay, moment, you are terrible: reinventing the philosophy of tragedy","authors":"","doi":"10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In order to be spoken, a tragic monologue which is the quintessence of any great tragedy, always required quite a special moment amidst action, approximately described as ‘stop-time’, ‘falling-out-of-time’ or ‘time-within-time’. This abruption of natural time-durance, formation of some strange lacuna in its usually monolith and constant flow, along with the strengthening of the emotional effect of such dramatic meditation by portraying it against the most depressing, uncomfortable or disastrous convulsions in the world around which seems to literally fall apart and leave the man to his own — was rarely regarded from the outside of dramatic art as a serious philosophical conception, a keystone event to present human self-awareness. Indeed, Plato already compared thinking (as a process) to the inner speech of soul communicating with itself (and thus knowing, noticing itself), and again, the same Plato suggested that to reach the real essence of things (which is the inborn aim of thinking), a human being must find itself on the breaking edge of existence where the material world is cast aside and the other world of godly truths starts to shine through — as it happens to the soldier Er in one of myths quoted in ‘Republic’, who seemingly fell in battle but as he lay neither dead nor alive his soul went to other planes to witness the divine order and then bring the knowledge of it back to people as Er resurrected. But the connection between the matrix of central elements in such enlightening tales (‘catastrophe of usual being’ — ‘transgression to some medium plane’ — ‘learning some all-changing truth there’ — ‘coming back to the world and oneself to speak the learnt to the people’), was never considered akin to that of the core elements of tragic climax. After Plato, Aristotle developed the idea that to think seriously we need a special time free of all else that storms our everyday lives — yet designing the laws of tragedy in ‘Poetics’, he didn’t ever let this intellectual transcendence counter the dramatic strives of actions and passions of its heroes (as well as the forth movement) although it was only one step away to admit their likelihood. The latter Christianity defiled tragedy as the way only to despair, and more to that, a theatrical illusion leading conscience astray. Only modern European thinkers from Pascal to Nietzsche and existentialists (with the significant help from outstanding authors like Shakespeare) brought back the notion of tragic to philosophical bloom again and re-presented the tragedy as one of the highest and most complicated arts devoted to human self-cognizance.","PeriodicalId":328399,"journal":{"name":"Vox. Philosophical journal","volume":"107 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vox. Philosophical journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37769/2077-6608-2022-36-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In order to be spoken, a tragic monologue which is the quintessence of any great tragedy, always required quite a special moment amidst action, approximately described as ‘stop-time’, ‘falling-out-of-time’ or ‘time-within-time’. This abruption of natural time-durance, formation of some strange lacuna in its usually monolith and constant flow, along with the strengthening of the emotional effect of such dramatic meditation by portraying it against the most depressing, uncomfortable or disastrous convulsions in the world around which seems to literally fall apart and leave the man to his own — was rarely regarded from the outside of dramatic art as a serious philosophical conception, a keystone event to present human self-awareness. Indeed, Plato already compared thinking (as a process) to the inner speech of soul communicating with itself (and thus knowing, noticing itself), and again, the same Plato suggested that to reach the real essence of things (which is the inborn aim of thinking), a human being must find itself on the breaking edge of existence where the material world is cast aside and the other world of godly truths starts to shine through — as it happens to the soldier Er in one of myths quoted in ‘Republic’, who seemingly fell in battle but as he lay neither dead nor alive his soul went to other planes to witness the divine order and then bring the knowledge of it back to people as Er resurrected. But the connection between the matrix of central elements in such enlightening tales (‘catastrophe of usual being’ — ‘transgression to some medium plane’ — ‘learning some all-changing truth there’ — ‘coming back to the world and oneself to speak the learnt to the people’), was never considered akin to that of the core elements of tragic climax. After Plato, Aristotle developed the idea that to think seriously we need a special time free of all else that storms our everyday lives — yet designing the laws of tragedy in ‘Poetics’, he didn’t ever let this intellectual transcendence counter the dramatic strives of actions and passions of its heroes (as well as the forth movement) although it was only one step away to admit their likelihood. The latter Christianity defiled tragedy as the way only to despair, and more to that, a theatrical illusion leading conscience astray. Only modern European thinkers from Pascal to Nietzsche and existentialists (with the significant help from outstanding authors like Shakespeare) brought back the notion of tragic to philosophical bloom again and re-presented the tragedy as one of the highest and most complicated arts devoted to human self-cognizance.
等等,片刻,你太可怕了:重新发明了悲剧的哲学
悲剧性独白是任何伟大悲剧的精髓,它总是需要在行动中有一个特别的时刻,大约可以用“停止时间”、“时间外的时间”或“时间内的时间”来形容。这种自然时间的中断,在它通常的整体和恒定的流动中形成了一些奇怪的空白,同时通过描绘它与世界上最令人沮丧,最不舒服或最灾难性的抽搐相对抗,从而加强了这种戏剧性冥想的情感效果,这些抽搐似乎真的崩溃了,让人独自一人从戏剧艺术的外部来看,很少被视为一个严肃的哲学概念,一个表现人类自我意识的关键事件。的确,柏拉图已经把思考(作为一种过程)比喻为灵魂与自己交流的内在话语(从而认识和注意到自己),同样,柏拉图认为,为了达到事物的真正本质(这是思考的天生目标),一个人必须发现自己处于存在的边缘,在那里,物质世界被抛弃,另一个世界的神圣真理开始闪耀就像在《理想国》中引用的一个神话中的士兵Er身上发生的那样,他似乎在战斗中倒下了,但因为他既不是死也不是活,他的灵魂去了其他层面见证了神圣的秩序,然后把它的知识带回给人们,因为他复活了。但是,在这些启发性的故事中,中心元素矩阵之间的联系(“平常生活的灾难”——“对某种中等层面的侵犯”——“在那里学到一些改变一切的真理”——“回到世界和自己向人们讲述所学到的东西”),从来没有被认为与悲剧高潮的核心元素相似。在柏拉图之后,亚里士多德发展了这样一种观点,即要认真思考,我们需要一个特殊的时间,不受日常生活中所有其他事物的干扰——然而,在《诗学》中设计悲剧法则时,他从未让这种智力上的超越与英雄们的行动和激情的戏剧性斗争(以及第四乐章)相抵触,尽管承认它们的可能性只有一步之遥。后一种基督教认为悲剧是通往绝望的道路,更糟糕的是,悲剧是一种使良心误入歧途的戏剧幻觉。只有从帕斯卡到尼采的现代欧洲思想家和存在主义者(在莎士比亚等杰出作家的重要帮助下),才使悲剧的概念再次在哲学上开花结果,并将悲剧重新呈现为致力于人类自我认识的最高和最复杂的艺术之一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信