The Crisis of Aesthetics, Aesthetics of CrisisPınar Akkoç Bayır
The coronavirus pandemic and the crisis it has brought about has resulted in inaction on the part of the individual. Not only the current crisis, but also the crises of the last century caused a passivity that was also noticeable in the artist, as the content of the artistic creation is not directly related to the current crisis, but rather is used as an escape route. In times of crisis the creative process does not process the material that is available under the given circumstances, instead art represents a means of accepting life as it is. The definition of art as a form of comforting illusion became a central theme in Nietzsche’s work towards the end of the 19th century as a result of crises. This essay deals with the question of whether the relevance of art for society will remain as long as it continues to function as a passive place of escape and cheer. In order to be able to examine this, the present study deals with Nietzsche’s The birth of tragedy because the work includes Nietzsche’s systematic reflections on aesthetics on which modern art is based. As a result, it was found that the current crisis could give rise to a crisis in abstract art that has been dominating the cultural milieu at the same time as pleading for inaction. In a new phase in which new concepts are being sought all over the world, it can hardly be expected that aesthetic principles will be preserved as they have prevailed for more than a hundred years.
Die Krise der Ästhetik, die Ästhetik der KrisePınar Akkoç Bayır
Die Coronavirus-Pandemie und die dadurch herbeigeführte Krise hat ein NichtHandeln des Individuums mit sich gebracht. Nicht nur die jetzige Krise, sondern auch die Krisen des vorigen Jahrhunderts verursachten eine Passivität, die sich auch beim Künstler bemerkbar machte. So wurde Kunst eher als ein Fluchtweg benutzt und der schöpferische Prozess verarbeitete nicht das Material, das ihm durch die gegebenen Umstände zur Verfügung stand. Wenn auch unbewusst, repräsentiert die Kunst in Krisenphasen ein Mittel, das Leben so hinzunehmen, wie es ist und jegliche Leiden zu akzeptieren. Die Definition von Kunst als eine tröstliche Illusion wurde gegen Ende des 19. Jahrhunderts infolge von Krisen zum zentralen Thema in Nietzsches Werk. Der vorliegende Aufsatz beschäftigt sich mit der Frage danach, ob die Relevanz der Kunst für die Gesellschaft bestehen bleiben wird, solange sie sich damit begnügt, als ein passiver Ort der Flucht und der Aufheiterung zu fungieren. Um der Frage zugrunde gehen zu können, befasst sich die vorliegende Untersuchung mit Nietzsches Werk Die Geburt der Tragödie, da das Werk die systematisierten Betrachtungen Nietzsches zur Ästhetik beinhaltet, auf denen die moderne Kunst basiert. Infolgedessen wurde festgestellt, dass die aktuelle Krise zugleich eine Krise dieser seit Anfang der Moderne vorherrschenden abstrakten und das Nicht-Handeln beschönigenden Kunstprinzipien hervorrufen könnte. In einer Phase, in der auf der ganzen Welt nach neuen Konzepten gesucht wird, ist es kaum zu erwarten, dass ästhetische Prinzipien so erhalten bleiben, wie sie nun seit mehr als hundert Jahren vorherrschen.
The coronavirus pandemic resulted in a phase during which the entire world was in a state of emergency and the majority of the population in European countries stayed in their homes. Such days made people realize how vital art actually is. People looked for support in the melodies they heard from the neighborhood or were in search for joy with the help of online galleries. In addition to the cruel photos from the hospitals, there were also numerous images of artistic productivity in varied forms. The hope and confidence hidden in art were contrasting hopelessness and skepticism. Art represented life, while the coronavirus kept reminding people of death. The coronavirus pandemic and the crisis it has brought about has resulted in inaction on the part of the individual. The following passive attitude towards life and ongoing politics is also noticeable in the artist, as the content of the artistic creation has never been directly related to the current situation in times of crises, but rather was used as an escape from the situation. The creative process does not process the material that is available under the given circumstances. Instead art usually represents a means of accepting life as it is with all its sorrow. With the current crisis, one can now see much more clearly how this conception of art, systemized for the first time by Nietzsche, is put into practice, so that its political and social significance is also recognizable. The present essay deals with the question of why, in the modern society, modern art in times of crisis has repeatedly tended towards a status of inaction and tried to provide an answer to crises with mere aesthetic principles. Especially in times of crisis, modern art has moved away from grasping connections, providing access to central social issues and presenting new views. Instead, in times of crisis, modern art has focused solely on the aesthetic content and, as a result, its scope was only as large as the formal limits of the work of art. However, the accumulation of far-reaching social crises in the 21st century makes the question unavoidable as to whether the relevance of art for society will remain as long as it continues to function as a passive place of escape and joy. Will the current crisis bring about the final end of classical tradition, so that art can no longer assume a pioneering character, no longer represent perspectives and alternatives and no longer have the power to show the possibility of a better world? Or will the current crisis at the same time cause a crisis in this abstract art that has been dominant since the beginning of modernism and asserts passivity, acceptance and inaction. This study examines Nietzsche’s ideas, which he systemized with his work The birth of tragedy, in order to be able to see the roots of the inactive status of the modern artist. On the basis of Nietzsche’s aesthetic principles, the study draws a conclusion about the attitude of the artist in times of crises. What is certain, however, is that in phases of great changes and upheavals, conventional political, aesthetic, and even legal norms have to be reorganized. This condition will shape art creation in the future. As a result, this article points out that the current crisis could at the same time give rise to a crisis in abstract art that has been dominating the cultural milieu at the same time pleading for inaction. In a new phase in which new concepts are being sought all over the world, it can hardly be expected that aesthetic principles will be preserved as they have prevailed for more than a hundred years.