Integrity of creative image for composing an analysis of literary work

Integrity of creative image for composing an analysis of literary work

Consciousness can work as a psyche, while the psyche being a consciousness. The prerequisites for artistic creativity, these sides are inseparably in principle as a basis. In science, we depend on a consciousness that runs with essences, trying to expel thoughts and experiences. In literature and art, emotion contains thought, in idea – feeling. The image is a synthesis of consciousness and psyche, ideas and feelings.

What is the basis for artistic creativity in literary analysis?

This appears to be the true basis of artistic imagination, that is feasible just because consciousness and psyche, being autonomous spheres, are in the same time inextricably linked. It really is impractical to lessen the image to the idea (towards the goal of the ideas): we ought to distract ourselves from feelings. To cut back the image to direct experience way to “not notice” the turnover of this psyche, being able to be fraught with idea.

But, the integrity regarding the image is not just a sensually observed thought (concept). The image is certainly not yet a means associated with the presence of simultaneously several principles (a system of concepts). The image is basically multivalued, it simultaneously contains aspects that are several. Technology can maybe not afford this. Concepts decrease an object phenomenon that is( to a single aspect, as much as one moment, deliberately abstracting from others. Science explores phenomena analytically with subsequent synthesis, practicing all of the moments of interrelation. Art, however, believes with regards to the meanings. Furthermore, the current presence of the amount of definitions is a vital condition for the “life” associated with creative image. It is impossible to determine what could be the meaning that is true what is the “more crucial” meaning.

Meaning of artistic notion of literary work

Theoretically, artistic content could be reduced up to a systematic, up to a logically developed system of concepts. However in practice that is impossible, which is not necessary. Our company is coping with the abyss of meanings. Also within the dilemma of the look of brand new semantic overtones, brand new deep meanings, about “self-production” of definitions in traditional works. Since a work may be recognized to the end only if the absolute rational unfolding of images is realized, it could be argued that the information of a very artistic work is a process that is endless.

So, the image is indecomposable. Its perception can simply be holistic: as an experience of thought, as a sensually sensed essence. Which is why the analysis that is scientific of tasks are a “double relative” cognition of artistic integrity: besides that the inexhaustibility of meanings can’t be reduced to something, with such cognition, the sufficient perception of emotions – empathy – is kept from the brackets.

The utmost complete perception regarding the aesthetic item is constantly multifaceted:

  • empathy,
  • co-creation,
  • way of integrity through clinical dialectical logic.

What provides the richness up to a work that is literary?

That is a visual (indistinguishable) perception. It is usually one-time, one-act. Perfectly alert to the truth that the integrity of a thing of beauty can’t be exhaustively described within the language that is formal of, we come across just one approach to scientific comprehension of the integrity: it should be examined as something that has a tendency to its limitation (this is certainly, e turning out to be its opposing). The literary critic does not need to do just about anything else, like analyzing a work supposedly as a method, keeping constantly in your mind that it’s maybe not the machine, but integrity. Another approach that is intuitive item is achievable, and even necessary, however it is maybe not taught. These approaches should always be mutually complementary, perhaps not exclusive. It should additionally be borne at heart that any artistically reproduced image of the planet can be a reduction (the whole globe can never be mirrored). So that you can reproduce the reduced picture around the globe, to produce a “model of life”, a certain code that is artistic required. This rule should therefore reduce steadily the global world, so that it can be done expressing the writer’s worldview. Such rule can’t be a picture by itself. A holistic creative image with all its unique opportunities continues to be just a technique, an easy method.

What’s the richness for the image? The solution, evidently, is only able to be one: someone.