{"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.
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。