{"title":"From allegory to figure and back again","authors":"Daniele Guastini","doi":"10.36253/aisthesis-14634","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of the article is to clarify the basic perspective that Immagini cristiane e cultura antica adopted to read the relationship between early Christian iconographic production – the main subject of the book – and the development of the forms of later figurative art, as well as the path leading to modern aesthetics.For this purpose, the article compares the positions of Auerbach – that had an explicit influence on the book – with those of Benjamin, regarding the different ways in which the two Berliner authors interpreted the meaning and the function of allegory. In Auerbach, allegory is understood as the past of the figura whose logic, according to Immagini cristiane e cultura antica, underlies not only the Christian literary production of the first centuries, but also the figurative one. In Benjamin, conversely, allegory is understood as the future of the figura, followed to the definitive crisis of Christian messianism.","PeriodicalId":447022,"journal":{"name":"Aisthesis. Pratiche, linguaggi e saperi dell’estetico","volume":"13 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aisthesis. Pratiche, linguaggi e saperi dell’estetico","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36253/aisthesis-14634","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
The aim of the article is to clarify the basic perspective that Immagini cristiane e cultura antica adopted to read the relationship between early Christian iconographic production – the main subject of the book – and the development of the forms of later figurative art, as well as the path leading to modern aesthetics.For this purpose, the article compares the positions of Auerbach – that had an explicit influence on the book – with those of Benjamin, regarding the different ways in which the two Berliner authors interpreted the meaning and the function of allegory. In Auerbach, allegory is understood as the past of the figura whose logic, according to Immagini cristiane e cultura antica, underlies not only the Christian literary production of the first centuries, but also the figurative one. In Benjamin, conversely, allegory is understood as the future of the figura, followed to the definitive crisis of Christian messianism.
文章的目的是澄清《基督徒与古代文化》(Immagini cristiane e cultura antica)所采用的基本视角,以解读该书的主要主题--早期基督教肖像画创作与后来具象艺术形式的发展之间的关系,以及通往现代美学的道路。为此,文章比较了对该书有明确影响的奥尔巴赫与本雅明的立场,即这两位柏林作家对寓言的意义和功能的不同解释方式。在奥尔巴赫那里,寓言被理解为具象的过去,根据《Immagini cristiane e cultura antica》一书,寓言的逻辑不仅是第一世纪基督教文学创作的基础,也是具象文学创作的基础。相反,在本雅明那里,寓言被理解为具象的未来,是基督教弥赛亚主义最终危机的后续。