How Parrhesia Works through Art The Elusive Role of the Imagination in Truth-Telling

Q2 Arts and Humanities
M. Paijmans
{"title":"How Parrhesia Works through Art The Elusive Role of the Imagination in Truth-Telling","authors":"M. Paijmans","doi":"10.22439/FS.V0I26.5750","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In his late lectures at the Collège de France, Foucault underpins the pre-eminence of art as the modern site of parrhesia. He omits, however, the aesthetic question: how does parrhesia work through art? A compelling question, firstly, because “truth-telling” seems to be at odds with art as an imaginative process. Secondly, because parrhesia implies a transformation in the listener, while Foucault’s limited notion of discourse precludes transformation beyond discourse. This essay hypothesizes that parrhesiastic art effects a transformation in the imagination, without dismissing this transformation as unreal. As Foucault’s utterances about the imagination are restricted to his earliest publications, this essay features a combined reading of Foucault’s early and late discussions of art. To further analyze the elusive role of the imagination in the late discussions, the essay employs the Deleuzian notion of “dramatization”, an epistemological method that draws on the imagination to escape representational thought. The essay thus aims to demonstrate that parrhesia mirrors the artwork in its intuitive and dynamic relation to truth. Subsequently, it argues that Foucault and Deleuze, respectively proceeding from a limited and an unlimited mode of thinking, come infinitely close in their thinking of art.","PeriodicalId":38873,"journal":{"name":"Foucault Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foucault Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22439/FS.V0I26.5750","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In his late lectures at the Collège de France, Foucault underpins the pre-eminence of art as the modern site of parrhesia. He omits, however, the aesthetic question: how does parrhesia work through art? A compelling question, firstly, because “truth-telling” seems to be at odds with art as an imaginative process. Secondly, because parrhesia implies a transformation in the listener, while Foucault’s limited notion of discourse precludes transformation beyond discourse. This essay hypothesizes that parrhesiastic art effects a transformation in the imagination, without dismissing this transformation as unreal. As Foucault’s utterances about the imagination are restricted to his earliest publications, this essay features a combined reading of Foucault’s early and late discussions of art. To further analyze the elusive role of the imagination in the late discussions, the essay employs the Deleuzian notion of “dramatization”, an epistemological method that draws on the imagination to escape representational thought. The essay thus aims to demonstrate that parrhesia mirrors the artwork in its intuitive and dynamic relation to truth. Subsequently, it argues that Foucault and Deleuze, respectively proceeding from a limited and an unlimited mode of thinking, come infinitely close in their thinking of art.
Parrhesia是如何通过艺术工作的——想象在讲真话中的隐晦作用
福柯在法国美术馆(Collège de France)的后期演讲中,强调了艺术作为现代艺术场所的卓越地位。然而,他忽略了美学问题:假牙是如何通过艺术发挥作用的?首先,这是一个令人信服的问题,因为“讲真话”似乎与艺术作为一个富有想象力的过程不一致。其次,因为假语意味着听者的转换,而福柯有限的话语概念排除了话语之外的转换。本文假设假造艺术在想象中产生了一种转变,但并不认为这种转变是不真实的。由于福柯关于想象力的论述仅限于他最早的出版物,本文结合阅读了福柯早期和晚期的艺术讨论。为了进一步分析想象力在晚期讨论中难以捉摸的作用,本文采用了德勒兹的“戏剧化”概念,一种利用想象来逃避具象思维的认识论方法。因此,本文旨在证明假语反映了艺术作品与真理的直观和动态关系。随后,福柯和德勒兹分别从一种有限的思维方式和一种无限的思维方式出发,认为他们的艺术思维是无限接近的。
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
Foucault Studies
Foucault Studies Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
36 weeks
×
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