Heidegger’s Philosophy of Art

Heidegger’s philosophy of art makes a shift away from the concepts revealed in Being and Time. He states that in order to reveal human’s awareness of existence, we must first look at death. Dasein is limited to this idea, that existing in reality is “being-toward-death” (page 123). This should not be confused as a negative concept, but as a way of recognizing one’s connection to time and to the world. Chapter Five furthers the discussion of Heidegger’s deconstruction of the Western Metaphysical tradition.

Heidegger realized that the same Western metaphysical model he was trying to challenge limited his previous method. In order to repair the problem, he needed to question the technical and manipulative style of his previous work. This required Heidegger to make a shift toward a meditative and poetic position. Meditative thinking gives man openness, allowing man to wait for Being. This is acceptable because “being human is distinguished by the potential to let things ‘come into unconcealment’” (page 124).

Heidegger returns to his roots in Greek methodology, remembering that thinking is a collected resource. Meditative thinking frees the will, which marks the response to things. Responsiveness requires waiting, which consequently leads to openness. The wait represents a form of subjectivity, because things disappear under the weight of man’s desire. Heidegger’s return to Greek thought represents an ontological difference between Western metaphysical notions and meditative thinking.

As we begin our discussion of art, Heidegger references all mediums. Our first view of a work gives us the impression that the artist produces the work. Then we consider that the artist is defined by his works; he is an artist because of his art works. Thus, art works define the artist. Separately, artist and art works are defined by art. The three categories—ready-to-hand, present-to-hand and Dasein—that Heidegger defines in Being and Time do not include art works.

The problem with ready-to-hand, is that it is too general. This keeps the thing too distant from the viewer. The issue with present-to-hand, is that things disappear under the weight of the definition. We do not comprehend beyond the physical, surface attributes and do not allow the thing to reveal itself. The third interpretation, Dasein, better interprets our view of things. It goes below the surface level of analysis to the roots of the “matter-form concept,” thus becoming “understanding of the nature of equipment rather than the thingly character of mere things” (page 127).

For example, a pair of shoes is not an art work because it is an accurate imitation of the actual object itself. Before they were painted, the shoes existed in actual form. The truth of the shoes in their actual form is hidden from the user, but revealed through the painting. A painting of the shoes converts the actual shoes into virtual form. Art is a representation of human feelings and experiences, a manipulation of virtual space.

The artist’s creation brings forth the character of the work’s mediums, which is something that requires the opportunity toward openness. The “world” of the artist is the “existential frame of reference of the living subject, the context within which human experience and significance take place” (page 132). Heidegger adds a historical notion to Husserl’s theory, stating that the “world” is ever-nonobjective as long as we maintain the cycle of beginning and end (life and death). The purpose of art is to divulge reality by describing and interpreting the world of the artist.

Heidegger then goes on to discuss the world of the art work. In order to be an art work, each work must establish a world with openness. This concept of virtual space establishes the structure and liberates the Open world by eliminating the death sentence. The world, through openness, is allowed to show itself. He highlights the difference between capital and lowercase “O”s a capital “O” is indicative of the ontological world and a lowercase “o” indicates making space for the world of the artist.

I am baffled and intrigued by the concepts presented in this chapter. The idea of considering death in order to better understand current existence is fascinating because it promotes looking at a bigger picture. Too often do we find ourselves trapped and obsessing over minute details. The separation between the world of the artist and the world of the art work and how they function together provides a more successful method for analysis. We frequently assume that the artist creates the work of art, and not the other way around. It is important to question the function of the work in its ontological world perhaps before and at least at the same time as we consider the artist’s purpose.