Casi siempre estas acciones son guerras o viajes y suelen ser muy extensas. Para resumir, cantaban y recitaban en las fiestas populares, ferias y talleres. Por lo general, eran poseedores de una memoria prodigiosa. Cuenta con 3. Los sistemas de castas se caracterizan por establecer "la desigualdad heredada como principio orientador de las relaciones sociales". Ya que para ellos todo se consigue con la fuerza corporal, el valor y la habilidad, para ellos todo se convierte en motivo de lucha y objeto de aventura personal.

Author:Akinomuro Togul
Language:English (Spanish)
Published (Last):23 April 2004
PDF File Size:15.49 Mb
ePub File Size:9.22 Mb
Price:Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]

Here are some points impress me af in this volume: 1. I totally suggest modern "progressives" or "conservatives" who really cannot understand a tiny bit of thing without naming or summoning or pressing complex phenomenon into some flat, general, arbitrary category first, cannot assert themselves without proclaiming their idea is some "general" or "historical" right choice, or right side, and believing themselves being so pioneer so new so revolutionary on insisting "diversity" or "defending classics" and it is "universally" preconditioned, should recite these below paragraphs down to their stomach every one hour, daily, with water: "One ought, really, never to speak of a uniform "style of the time" dominating a whole period, since there are at any given moment as many different styles as there are artistically productive social groups.

Even in epochs in which the most influential work is found on a single class, and from which only the art of this class has come down to us, it ought to be asked whether the artistic products of other groups may have been buried or lost. Their universalism is a fellowship of the elite - of the elite as formed by absolutism.

Rationalism Rationalism corresponds not with naturalism, when its time comes, it undermines the artistic creativity - yep, not new point, but Hauser in fact illustrates the whole line of how rationalism comes first as a creative support to art then turned, not without intermingling struggles of power and swinging of sides which imprints its mark on society and art industry, into a dictatorship of dogma in court and the anarchy art market among middle class.

What level of fancy job are we talking about here? At first, Hauser points out that, "the doctrine of spontaneous naturalism of Renaissance comes from the same source as the theory that the fight against the spirit of authority and hierarchy [ What we are talking about the most impressive or "progressive", by its good meaning achievement of Renaissance art is its rationalization of beauty: "The whole development of art becomes part of the total process of rationalization.

The irrational ceases to make any deeper impression. And just a central perspective is space seen from a mathematical standpoint, and right proportions are only equivalent to the systematic organization of the individual forms in a picture, so in the course of time call criteria of artistic quality are subjected to rational scrutiny and all the laws of art are rationalized.

Notwithstanding such alliance with rationalism is far from stable, especially after those artists found their soul mates among humanistic intellectuals: The latent conflict between the intellectual and the economic upper class is nowhere openly engaged as yet, least of all by the artists, who, with their less developed social consciousness, react more slowly than their humanistic masters.

But the problem, even if it is un-admitted and unexpressed is present all the time and in all places, and the whole intelligenstsia, both literary and artistic, is threatened by the danger of developing either into an uprooted, "unbourgeois", and envious class of bohemians or into a conservative, passive cringing class of academics.

The humanists escape from from this alternative into their ivory tower, and finally succumb to both the dangers which they had intended to avoid. But the more "unhealthy" result happened both in high court dominated society and middle-class ruled one. In France, within the reign of Louis XIV, artists in public are supervised under the guidance of authority eg. Le Brun, Colbert , academic theories rules the canvas, art was constrained within the palaces and inwardness, fame of King and reputation of court, lost the connection to reality but became a mere decoration of glory, whilst claiming their standard of classicist "being universal" as they are the "citizens of the world": " The special characteristic of the new social and economic forms is the anti-individualistic tendency derived from the idea of the absolute state.

There is hardly a rule or a requirement of classicistic aesthetics which is not based on the ideas of this absolutism. The desire is that art should have a uniform character, like the state, should produce the effect of formal perfection, like the movement of a corps, that it should be clear and precise, like a decree, and be governed by absolute rules, like the life of every subject in the state.

The artist should be no more left to his own devices than any other citizen; he should rather be guided by the law, by regulations, so as not to go astray in the wilderness of his own imagination. Rationalism among prevailed middle class creates a new middle class art with psychological depth and a vivid realization of own psyche limitation, the intensified concentration comes from the next-level naturalism approach that "not only to make spiritual things visible, but all visible things a spiritual experience.

The spiritual existence of the artist is always in danger; neither an authoritarian nor a liberal order of society is entirely free from peril for him; the one gives him less freedom, the other less security. There are artists who feel safe only when they are free, but there are also such as can breathe freely only when they are secure.

The seventeenth century was, at any rate, one of the period furthest removed from the ideal of synthesis of freedom and security. Oh babe. I should have put Machiavelli to number 0 instead 3 because, I think, he is in fact the eye of the tiger Machiavelli was merely the first to make men conscious of political realism: "It was not the violence of the tyrant which caused the general shock and not the panegyrics of their court poets which filled the world with indignation, but the justification of their methods by a man who allowed the gospel of gentleness to stand alongside the philosophy of force, the rights of the noble alongside those of the clever, and the morality of the "lions" alongside that of the "foxes".

Ever since there existed rulers and ruled, masters and servants, exploiters and exploited, there also existed two different orders of morality, one for the powerful, the other for the powerless. Yet when every liars seems speak the language of Machiavelli, all sharp-wittedness was distrusted, we know Machiavelli is like the Freud behind the slip of tongue, the wake in the face of the truth is chaotic and painful and a total lost for it was a realization that "reality was obedient to its own stern necessity,that all mere ideas were powerless when faced with its relentless logic, and that the only alternative was submit to or be destroyed by it".

Machiavelli is inevitable, Machiavelli is the wheel to a awakened world. Thus when Michelangelo even in his work eg. Medici Chapel betrayed the high renaissance but adopted the twisted body and uncanny spatial structure within which the world is longer felt home to human being, that unclassic spirit is the breaking of spatial unity of Renaissance earlier tradition, like a dream world where real by common meaning connections are abolished.

And it was painful. Hauser is for sure a Templar. He did a decent critical approach on Machiavelli, the one and only legendary Master Assassin who might want to write a book about Ezio Auditore. LOL 4. In fact Hauser also talked about Cervantes, which is good and decent, but the Shakespeare part catches me more. You sure? Are you serious, Arnold??? I enjoyed most of this book, but the Shakespeare part, Hauser is too selective on his information and approach, which in one way or another, looks like using Shakespeare to round his research and ideas on the political realism and decline of chivalry tradition, which is, not an uncommon strategy but far from decent if not hardly forgivable.

What a shame.


Historia Social de la Literatura y del Arte. Hauser Arnold



Historia social de la literatura y el arte



Historia social de la literatura y el arte i Arnold Hauser


AM2301 DHT21 PDF

Historia social de la literatura y el arte II


Related Articles