| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立中央大學 === 藝術學研究所 === 88 === Abstract
For a long time the interest in Lessing''s Laocoon: an Essay on the Limits of Painting and Poetry has been focused on the claim that "successive" and "coexistent" are the distinguishing features of the media of poetry and painting respectively and thus should be characteristic of their respective objects. This critical essay has been considered putting an end to the long tradition of comparing poetry and painting (ut pictura poesis); it also has been viewed as leading the way of studying the arts from the perspective of the "signs (media)". The theme of my thesis is to analyze the criticism and underlying theory of Laocoon, and thus to observe what happened to the conceptions and relationship of poetry and painting which have been formed under the tradition of ut pictura poesis vis-a-vis the system and conception of the beaux-arts in the eighteenth century. Moreover, it''s also a task of this thesis to try to interpret and manifest the significance of Laocoon in and against the heredity of poetry-painting relationship discourses. In my opinion, it''s not enough just to look at the displayed attitude and statement as emphasizing "similarity" or "difference" between poetry and painting. My thesis proposes that within the conception of the beaux-arts of the eighteenth century could the matter (why Lessing set up rules according to the characteristics of each medium) be better explicated.
The first chapter outlines "ut picture poesis": from the core of the tradition established on the basis of ancient authority to the prevalent "parallels" and comparison and distinction between poetry and painting in the late seventeenth and the first half of the eighteenth century. It''s worth noting that these distinctions are usually based on the three sets of opposite terms: artificial sign/natural sign, successive/coexistent, audible/visible. The second chapter studies the opinions of poetry and painting in Laocoon from the point of view of "picture." In this analysis, we display the way Lessing regards poetry and painting, and this is found to be relevant to his artistic ideal. Besides, we find out Lessing''s possible connection to the "ut pictura poesis" tradition, since the claim that poetry should "present images as vivid as pictures" is just the central concept of "ut pictura poesis." Taking this perspective, We go on exploring and organizing Lessing''s views on "poetic pictures" and "material pictures." The third chapter focuses on examining the important theoretical foundations supporting Lessing''s critical statements, namely, his views and reasoning on the signs (media) used by poetry and painting. In fact, Lessing''s aim is not simply picking out the differences between poetry and painting, but rather solving the problem that "what specific rules should each particular art follows in order to produce the greatest artistic effect" under the given premise of "the differences of media." In analyzing how Lessing applies "artificial signs" and "natural signs" to poetry and painting, we find that "natural signs" is the ideal Lessing holds for artistic signs (including both poetry and painting). And the meaning of the "natural signs" being the ideal forms of poetry and painting resides in the claim that signs or media become transparent and self-effacing during aesthetic perception. Therefore, the seers seem to see the things themselves directly, and have experience of illusion.
On the whole, the discourses of "ut pictura poesis," in the middle of the eighteenth century when Lessing was situated, have the tendency to deal with the common ground of poetry and painting and the respective ranges of representation according to the differences of media, instead of the emulating relationship such as "as is painting, so is poetry" and vice versa. In accordance with this tendency is the change of the conception of art; the emphasis has been gradually transformed from the "art of poetry" and the "art of painting" to "the study of aesthetic perception and experience" and "the finding of the ways of construction of artistic signs which match this kind of experience." And even in the mode of discourses can we see the shift from "rhetoric" to "philosophical reasoning."
|
|---|
