I’m just hopping around Aristotle’s corpus trying to get a non-ordinary view of each of his texts
On Poetics, while certainly about tragedy, has a concern that extends beyond poetry to the very structure of the human soul in its relation to what is.
Can you believe that someone interested in these things is collectively scapegoated, has feds break into their house, generally is treated as someone who should be “auto-suicided”? Believe it. Well it is a satisfactory feeling to be one of the final spiritual Normans remaining and to laugh in all their faces despite all of that. THAT is not a feeling they will ever experience, being on the “sad slave” side of the relation. “This anomaly proves we’re all niggers, what are we going to do??” Dunno, study people like Aristotle? I only try to help.
Here’s another one of those old Greek words we’ll have to spend some time on
This is the root word of “myth”.
sigh, If you don’t know the plots of the tragedies he speaks of in this aesthetic treatise… you’re really missing out. You should familiarize yourself with them.
They’re written with line-breaks, they’re really easy to read.
Think about Gadamer from earlier- these plays DEFINE “art” for me. And that’s a common experience for those who know them. So it’s your choice if you want to be artless.
Let’s try to keep in mind the connection between the Eleusinian Mysteries and tragic drama. It’s not a coincidence that the one followed the other. “The gods” are everywhere in the tragedies. And Aristotle’s Poetics is a rational account of tragedy.
Do you remember how there were three stages of initiation in the Mysteries? One might argue this is a type of “plot”. A proto-plot better yet. Because those Mysteries existed for hundreds of years before even Homer. Unfortunately, Aristotle’s main writings on Homer are mostly lost.
“For god’s sake, just talk about the jews!! That’s why I’m here!” I usually am, in an indirect way. We need to return to the origins of drama to reverse hollywood engineering and create a new hollywood modeled off the originary drama. I mean, I like Molière too, he’s just no Aeschylus.
Let’s just continue with the essential philology of this. Muthos is also translated as “story”. PLOT is the more technical and precise translation. “Story” is conventional.
There are plots in real life too. “Stories” are only supposed to help us “understand” those plots, and we shouldn’t forget that.
Jews are this brainless in relation to the egregore
Even the reactionary ones have no qualms with serving the higher jews who promulgate communism. If this isn’t already obvious to you I doubt there’s much hope for you.
That’s part of the “plot” happening in real-time.
Politics aside though, here I am investigating in a universal human sense what “religion” is. Art originally emerged from this initiationism milieu. And people prefer art to the churches today. So I find it important to wonder what preceded the original art.
Katharsis is a “cleansing”. Do we have that in a real AND good sense today? If we don’t have true religion in society then we have idolatry, and that will cause depression, because that means people aren’t connected with the highest reality.
We’re only speaking of one particular text here. In the Poetics there is a plot…
Nothing falls out of the sky. Drama emerges from the Eleusinian Mysteries, philosophy emerges from drama.
Original philosophy was an exotericization of the esoteric and also a type of “literary criticism”. I.e. all the Sophists were Homerians, and later Euripideans, etc.
The Poetics wasn’t recovered until around 1500. Originally there was a second part, on comedy. So we can only vaguely speculate what Aristotle’s mind saw between both of those.
Sticking with tragedy out of necessity, what is peculiar about this techne (art)? There is a chorus that is a character unto itself. This is a form of early self-reflection. Philosophy seems to be a type of chorus remarking on the plot of art.
Pretty “weird” right? Yeah, when you study the Greeks you find lots of “weird” things.
The chorus sings and also speaks in dialogue with the play. It has two modes of talking (logos).
This is another form of “pre-Socratic”. Greek tragedy lasted only about a hundred years. So you can see the three main tragedians as a “Heraclitus” that survived not only in fragments.
Whatever its lifespan, this is what the surviving treatise on aesthetics of Aristotle centers around. “Aesthetics” was called poietikes. It’s foggy what the latter word really means. Usually it’s translated as to make or to produce. So the title of this treatise is really closer to “On the Making of Poetry”. Aristotle saw tragedy as the peak of poetry.
I’m an evil bad man for talking about this stuff I guess
So where did drama and philosophy really begin?
For the “art-lovers” of the island of Crete, tragedy was the making of action. This is the meaning of dran– action. So another way of looking at the the title of Poetics is that it could be seen as “The Making of Acting”. What IS an actor? This is something not many know, because they only experience art as “real”.
I myself, humbly submit, that I am not an actor. An actor or a poet pretends to be something. They create imitations of reality. This is also the case with the sophist.
I always try to put myself in the “plot” out of honesty- I sincerely do not feel like an actor or an artist, I think me and these types are distinct species.
Whatever bitterness you want to have, I AM a (Kanto-Hegelian-inflected) “Socrates-type”
Again, this is the “plot”. The arts do not understand what Being itself is. They operate on an ignorant image of it that was bequeathed to them by other sophists of the past.
And yes, we are also speaking of the difference between man and woman here.
A cunning sophist, my favorite play-thing. Also irredeemable in many cases.
I am trying to recreate the original relation between art and philosophy here.
I don’t know, being distinct species we’re pretty blind to each other’s nature, and I’ve taught you philosophy so why don’t you teach me art?
“It can’t be taught!!” You only say that while acting. Can you ever leave your role?