Romano Ingardeno problema ir „mirties“ klausimas mene
The problem of Roman Ingarden and the issue of “death” in art

Summary/Abstract: The article deals with the relationship between the author and his hero in the context of aesthetics of literary work. There is shown that Ingaarden’s problem of epistemological skepticism emerges as a contradiction between the epistemological relapse and the phenomenological view. The antinomy of work of art follows a tension between epistemological aspiration and temporal existential experiences. These different layers of work of art characterize it as a polyphonic hermeneutical, ethical, aesthetical and existential whole. The thesis: the work of art demands the “death” of the author, i. e. his standoff from the further “life” of the literary work. On the other hand, the very creation (created heroes) demands the constant author’s renewal. The hermeneutical act of understanding is analyzed analogously to creative act, and the reader is equated to the creator. Thus, the understanding of the work of art is developed as the polyphony of aesthetical and ethical aspirations and supposes existential creation. It is asserted that the depicted death has a positive status of reality, because it expands our horizon of culture as an existential creation. The relationship between hermeneutical activity and passivity is analyzed. Passivity in the understanding of the work of art requires activity in creating an existential project, and vice versa, creative activity requires the understanding of life. In this way the author and his hero take part in the existential co-creation that forms the content of culture. It is suggested to overcome Ingarden’s antinomy with the help of this existential phenomenology. According to the author of the article, the existential-phenomenological approach is applied to the interpretation of different works of culture. Ingarden’s demarcation line between works of science and art is rejected. It is stated that the works of different genres are understood in the context of polyphony of existential creation, which includes the ethical and aesthetical aspects. A new criterion of demarcation between scientific (philosophy) and artistic works is suggested. It is a direct utterance of the author: the work of science (philosophy) reveals the position of the author, while the work of art, on the contrary, hides, “kills” the author. The direct self-expression of the author is supposed to damage the artistry of work.

• Details
• Contents