Epilogue
The epilogue was difficult to summarize as so much of the section is dedicated to quoting different poems to validate Santner’s argument. Therefore, I’m sorry for its abbreviated nature.
This final section covers Rosenzweig’s understanding of redemption as “the movement outward into the world on behalf of revelatory love – in the context of aesthetic artifacts” (130). Hegel’s manifesto for German Idealism included this statement about the “structural tension between paganism and revelation: Monotheism of reason and the heart, polytheism of imagination and art, this what we require! First I will speak of an idea which, as far as I know, has never occurred to anyone – we must have a new mythology, but this mythology must stand in the service of ideas, it must become a mythology of reason” (131). This desire for aesthetic philosophy will create a mythology of reason that came to be understood as instituting the advent of a new Johnannine Age of the Sprit, in which a new sense of freedom would be established for the universality of man.
Rosenzweig associated the life of the work of an art with the theological categories of creation, revelation, and redemption. Redemption parallels the reception of the work of art by a community. In the work of art the, “the act of reception, this completion of the work of art, represents a rupture in the life of the work – a “strong misreading” we might say – performed by one who feels singled out, addressed by it” (133). The multiplicity of interpretations of the work of art makes it inexhaustible because every reading is something of a creation ex nihilo. These creative, violent readings are performative interventions that open up new horizons of re-thinking art, and in Rosenzweig’s case his reading of Holderlin can the disrupt normal homogenizing interpretations. The debates surrounding Holderlin involve whether we should read him as being “dedicated primarily to “horizontal” relations, to a vision of social pace and harmony beyond tructures [sic] of domination and belligerence, or one involved primarily with the “vertical” axis of human-divine encounter” (134).
Beauty must be rethought as a form of harmony or symmetry but rather as “a self interrupting whole – one animated, as it were, but a “too much” of pressure from within the midst” (136). Beautiful objects disarm us and release us back into the midst of life, as opposed to keeping our defenses in tact. This is the framework through which Santner wants to read Holderlin’s poetry qua Rosenzweig. As opposed to the typical teleological, forward-moving view of history, Santner believes that Holderlin was a poet inhabiting the middle of life with courage. Santner believes that we should have “an appreciation for the dimension of the remnant immanent in the beautiful, for an aesthetics of what I have referred to as the interrupted or self-interrupting whole. What is beautiful, in this view I am proposing, moves because its own formal composition and procedures produce more reality than it can contain” (139).
Santner wants us to rethink the remnant, which is “the part that is not a part of a whole but rather the opening beyond the “police order” of parts and holes. What poets establish is not some sort of vision or consciousness of the All; rather they introduce into the relational totality of social existence – into the social body divided into parts – the perspective of the “non-all”
Discussion/Question
Religious rituals are often highly routinized and monotonous. Many times believers go through the motions and fulfill their duties in a robotic, disengaged manner. In what ways could sacraments and rituals be used to help open up one to the very alienness at the heart of life itself?
Back to the unconscious, I think something that can disrupt the functioning of everyday life is a close attention to the unconscious. I’ve found that when one listen to not only one’s unconscious but to the Other’s unconscious, one is often surprised by what one hears. One is not merely scandalized, but also humored by the eccentricities of the unconscious. In what way can humor be implemented in everyday life to shake one’s self out of slumber? How can humor be a theological tool? It seems Kierkegaard above all was aware of the utter absurdity of Christianity. How else can humor and the unconscious come to affect the way we not only think but live theology.
Read Full Post »