The Ontology of the Work of Art - Assignment Example

 A Discussion of Themes: Roman Ingarden’s, The Ontology of the Work of Art Roman Ingarden is one of the leading followers of phenomenological ontology, which attempts to determine what the ontological structure and status of objects of various types must be. The idea is based on examining essential features of any experience that could present or provide knowledge of such objects—a method based on the assumption that there are essential correlations between the kinds of objects and the modes of cognition by means of which they can be known. Through a systematic demonstration of the existence of such objective essences, as are implied by topics in Roman Ingarden’s, The Ontology of the Work of Art, an application of ideas such as the portrait and the stratum of presented objects, a comparison between the picture and the painting, and Non-Presentational (abstract) pictures will be explored in detail. In discussing the portrait, the idea of aesthetics must be explored. The nature of aesthetic values was generally employed by Ingarden. (Web/Online1) Ingarden distinguishes the true aesthetic object in a piece of work as both the “physical” and the “concretization” or gap. (Web/Online1) For Ingarden, there are three different strata in which pictures are to be analyzed with respect to the portrait: (1) the reconstructed aspect, (2) the presented object coming to appearance, and (3) the literary theme. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p151, ch2) Literary works and the characters and objects represented in LAST NAME, 2 them were to provide examples of “purely intentional objects, which are those, owing their existence to conciousness”. (Web/Online1) The cooperation of each of these strata will enable an object to hold “metaphysical qualities, such as tragedy, the dreadful, the peaceful, and so on.” (Web/Online) However, if a literary theme is lacking, Ingarden states: “If the exercising of this function is to succeed, then the object presented in the picture must at least be similar in a certain respect to the object that is depicted, and that is ordinarily not perceptually given during the contemplation of the portrait.” (Meyer & Goldthwait, p151, ch2) Similarly, physical attributes are not singularly presented in a physical object, such as a person; it is those concepts of metaphysical, such as spirituality shown in the face that is what holds significance, rather than merely the face itself. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p151, ch2) It is important to regard the “lasting traits” of the object, according to Ingarden. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p151, ch2) The portrait can be “dissimilar in regards to the purely physical appearance”, however it still carries with it a character trait pertaining to the person. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p152, ch2) In criticizing the stratum theory used by Ingarden, it can be noted that there are significant conflicts which arise. For example, judgments of taste may occur, where individuals may be passing judgments on different parts of the strata of the piece of work. (Web/Online1) Both the literary theme and the depicting function are not necessities in relation to the function of a portrait. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p152, ch2) For example, this can be reviewed by the works of older portraits, in which individuals being portrayed are long passed and their name is unknown; and consequently the picture cannot be analyzed by its depicting function. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p152, ch2) Tymieniecka suggests in her LAST NAME, 3 book, Phenemology World-Wide, that for Ingarden, “purely intentional objects constitute the most infirm form of being, to come into being and remain in being, they require the existence of objects with a stronger existential status: real objects in which they are fixed, the conscious experience of the artist from which they are derived, aesthetic contact with a viewer who maintains their existence”. (Tymieniecka, 193) The phenomenal features which are depicted in the object must be experienced with “phenomenal knowledge”, which is necessary in order to distinguish similar comparisons. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p152, ch2) For example, conscious comparison of similar objects is not necessary when attempting to establish the phenomenon of similarity because the similarity will be achieved without trying to compare. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p152, ch2) Furthermore, the portrait must be realized as a mere “phantom”, or an “imitated” object, as it is not illustrating reality, but it is showing a reconstruction of what is depicted. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p153, ch2) For Ingarden, the object “pretends to be the depicted object”, but in essence is also concealing that it is a “copy”. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p153, ch2) Furthermore, the abstract, or non-presentational picture, are those in which do not allow the viewer to readily identify a presented object in a piece of work. The primary issue to consider here is that there are no bodies represented in the presented space of an artwork that will “extend beyond the surface of the painting”. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p207, ch9) A criticism that can be made with reference to the abstract picture is that it essentially reduces the picture to a two-dimensional space, rather than its former three-dimensional content, which is made by the presence of a body. By not representing bodies in the painting, it denies the viewer to perceive the “mental states of the persons LAST NAME, 4 that are expressed in their bodily states”. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p207, ch9) In addition, a question may arise as to whether the picture is really a picture because the “stratified structure of the picture disappears”. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p207, ch9) For Ingarden, the idea of a non-presentational picture stems from the aesthetic value of color formations and “the appearance of different colors, even on a small scale, brings a certain life into the dead mass of the architectural body”. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p208, ch9) He uses examples to illustrate his point, such as the “covering of the walls of a Renaissance palace with many-colored frescos, which often present something”. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p209, ch9) Thus, even architectural framing cannot simply take up spatial design; it must also include colors and shapes. It should also be included that an actual building is not a stratum, but the actual picture has two strata: “one a stratum of manifold two-dimensional visual aspects, the other a three dimensional Gestalt which shares some properties with the physical building but is not identical with it”. (Galewicz, Stroker, & Strozewski, 138) Similarly, the richness of color on an interior space serves as a “decorative” function, which illustrates the harmonies of both the painting and its surroundings. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p209, ch9) The idea of pure color concentrations allows for shapes to be represented by colors alone. There are also pictures that do not represent a decoration value, as they “require the viewer to isolate from their whole environment” and the picture alone is the concentration. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p210, ch9) There are a few critiques to this however. The attempt to isolate one from their outside environment may not work, and if it does not then a question arises whether the picture is sufficient and if it LAST NAME, 5 is an “independent work of art”. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p209, ch9) Under this decorative feature that abstract plays, the aesthetic object is a construct, according to Ingarden: a development in time, a deliberate effort to subsume the represented objects under a concept, to determine them to the best of one’s ability in their relations to other represented objects… The aesthetic sentiment or harmony which arises from the aesthetic experience, derives, therefore, not from the free-play of understanding and imagination, but from the relations between various parts of the work and between the whole as they are understood by the viewer. (Tymieniecka, 205) Ingarden suggests that abstractionists claim: “In a purely abstract picture, nothing can be falsified.” (Meyer & Goldthwait, p212, ch9) Additionally, in order to effectively compare and contrast the idea of the picture and the painting found in Chapter 8 of the text, a qualitative analysis of each must be imposed. In the text specifically, a painting is classified as “a real thing formed out of this or that material (wood, canvas, and so on)”. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p197, ch8) Ingarden believes that although the painting as a whole is environmentally influenced, many changes occur as a result of various properties produced by the artist, which is special to the picture; however it is not something that enters the ingredient elements. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p197, ch8) The single importance for a painting is its configuration of color pigments and the fact that it contains a flat surface. Consequently, the picture is illustrated as: a purely intentional object suigeneris that on one hand, has the foundation of being that determines it and founds it in the real painting, or, more precisely, in the color patches that cover the painting. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p200, ch8) LAST NAME, 6 Similarly, Ingarden associates ‘modes of givenness’, which differentiate the picture as “an intentional entity” and the painting as the “real thing”. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p201, ch8) It is important to identify the original picture and the copy, as it founds in the color patches that cover the painting. On the other hand, a painting is able to have constructed copies from its original, however there are a few criticisms that may arise based on the color tones in the reproduction, which may deviate from the original; and obviously in monetary value, the copy will never be quite the same as the original. For Ingarden, it is the unavoidable “aging” of the painting that will cause even the original to change its chemical pigments of color. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p201, ch8) However, visual perception is a key component in comparing the picture and the painting. For example, Meyer & Goldthwait include: “the experiencing of these visual sense data is used for carrying out a completely different act, namely, for affecting the act of apprehend¬ing the picture.” (Meyer & Goldthwait, p203, ch8) In viewing the painting, we see its parts or ‘properties’, such as the layering of colors. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p203, ch8) In the text, Hussed aims to illustrate the function of the color patches within a painting: the color patches that the painter has placed upon the paper provide to us a determinate material of sense data that now performs a fully different function than in the perception of the painted paper. Instead of bringing to given-ness the properties of the painted paper, they make possible to us a quasi-perceptual apprehension of the object presented ‘in the picture’ (Meyer & Goldthwait, p204, ch8) The perception of the picture is not without complications, however, as Hussed demonstrates that as soon as the “peripheral consciousness of the painting passes over LAST NAME, 7 into a ‘thematic’ consciousness, then the picture disappears out of the field of vision, and therewith that which is presented in the picture”. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p205, ch8) Furthermore, there is the notion to be discussed regarding the position in which a piece is viewed. The idea surrounds “perspecitval seeing”, which is forced by the picture. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p206, ch8) There is an accuracy issue that takes place, which centers on “correctly seeing the space presented in the picture and the things situated in this space.” (Meyer & Goldthwait, p206, ch8) Consequently, if we are to view the picture in a different aspect, then the experience of that picture will be quite different. Ingarden illustrates here that “the color data of the painting underlying this aspect are subjected to a foreshortening when they are viewed from an incorrect place”. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p206, ch8) The example used shows that when picking up a picture of a familiar person, or object to us, and holding it upside down, it is difficult to grasp the object in the same way as we know it. (Meyer & Goldthwait, p206, ch8) Basically, the viewers’ vision is changed based on his or her field of vision of the picture. In Roman Ingarden’s, The Ontology of the Work of Art, the ideas expressed are rooted in the phenomenological ontology, which illustrates both the status and structure of objects. Various features are expressed within the text, as they include concepts such as different strata imposed on pieces of works; the ideas of a literary theme in art; real objects versus copies; dimensional issues; design through aesthetic features; and the perceptive vision of an object at various angles. There is a definite correlation between the kinds of objects and the modes of cognition by means of which they can be known. After illustrating various concepts in relation to Ingarden and his views on each, an LAST NAME, 8 analysis of three central themes have been made, such as a distinction between the portrait and the stratum of presented objects, the features of Non-Presentational (abstract) Pictures, and a concise comparison between the picture and the painting. Through each theme, criticisms were outlined based on particular features within each and pointed out specific dilemmas arising in particular areas. In particular, the idea of the Strata where there are significant conflicts which arise, such as the judgments of taste, in which individuals may pass judgments on different parts of the strata of the piece of work. Similarly, there is the problem with the use of a non-object, which creates a two-dimensional element instead of its original three-dimensions. Moreover, there are critical issues relating to the concepts of making copies from original work. Through each of these topic criticisms, there have essentially been double sided issues, which either promote or negatively affect its theme. Ingarden’s text generally employs ideals, which aim to guide such themes as have been presented above. Through analytical conceptions, these themes have been presented and explained as concisely as possible. LAST NAME, 9 WORKS CITED References: Raymond Meyer with John T. Goldthwait. (1989). The Ontology of the Work of Art. Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press. Tymieniecka, Anna-Teresa. (2003). Phenemology World-Wide. Netherlands: Springer. [Available Web/Online1] http://books.google.ca/books?ie=UTF8&hl=en&id=fGLZ_iMSv-cC&dq=ontology+of+work+of+art+Ingarden&prev=http://books.google.ca/books%3Fq%3Dontology%2Bof%2Bwork%2Bof%2Bart%2BIngarden&lpg=PA193&pg=PA194&sig=8ECl7CqorMh_grdR0wwenLK6-M4 [Accessed: December 12, 2005] Read More