The Anthropology of Performance (III)
From his side, Turner stated the same when he spoke of a 'social drama' performed by a Homo performans (the free individual performer of himself) inasmuch as a fundament of socio-cultural dynamics. [13] This conflictive, anti-establishment atittude of Turner (anti-fit, anti-congruence) perfectly agreed with the 'ethical individualism' of Steiner. The main difference between them being the frontier of the limits of knowledge.
According to Steiner, Western Culture had tended to establish 'Columns of Hercules' (Non Plus Ultra) to human knowledge. On one side, the frontier of thought (psychic inner world), on the other side the barrier of physical world ( the 'in itself' or essence of Kant). [14] Approached from Steiner's angle, Performance would concern a Homo performans who would face the limits of knowledge. [15] Then, this would determine two kinds of action: the one limited to the plane of inmediate and concrete material appearance which derives from ordinary language in its sole abstract and fonctional context; the other one expanded to the qualitative plane of ternary universal conscience (body, soul, spirit) whose ideal model would the (forgotten) art of speech as in Steiner's eurhythmy. [16] Between the one and the other would take place the free man who does or does not confront the limits of knowledge. In the first case that man must go over an 'initiatic path'.
According to Rudolf Steiner's evolutionist conception of history man would have evolved from inferior levels of conscience in relation to the holistic power of the image up to a state of rational conscience linked to the development of written language (the fragmentation of reality). The Myth of Osiris would describe this transition in the image of the death of Osiris (cut into pieces) at Biblos: the craddle of the Phoenician Alphabet. Furthermore, Hebrew prophetism would have contributed to that evolution in its opposition to politheism and ancient mantics (sybyllism, mediumnism, whichtcraft, devination, magic, astrology, etc).
Based on the principle of Goethe's metamorphosis, the 'Tragedy of Karma' would relate to an in extenso notion of language where we could distinguih two categories: the microcosmic, concerning human psyche and time; the macrocosmic referring to spirit and universal space. In its macrocosmic acception, Steiner distinguishes what he calls 'celestial writing', capable of being red by ancient initiates like the Three Kings (magi) of the Christian tradition. In some of his cycles of conferences such as the one concerning the Holly Grial Steiner develops the question of a cosmic christian ritual. [17]
Allways according to Steiner, man would be intrinsically united to the cosmic Whole body-soul-spirit. That is how the living or affective experience of the man conscient of his position in that Whole would naturally lead him toward the revelation of ternary reality. [18] The opposite approach, rationalist abstraction, would tend to separate man from universal nature to isolate him in the material rapports among the phenomena and to distance him from the balance that he must establish between the opposite poles of the cosmic reality.
According to Steiner, Western Culture had tended to establish 'Columns of Hercules' (Non Plus Ultra) to human knowledge. On one side, the frontier of thought (psychic inner world), on the other side the barrier of physical world ( the 'in itself' or essence of Kant). [14] Approached from Steiner's angle, Performance would concern a Homo performans who would face the limits of knowledge. [15] Then, this would determine two kinds of action: the one limited to the plane of inmediate and concrete material appearance which derives from ordinary language in its sole abstract and fonctional context; the other one expanded to the qualitative plane of ternary universal conscience (body, soul, spirit) whose ideal model would the (forgotten) art of speech as in Steiner's eurhythmy. [16] Between the one and the other would take place the free man who does or does not confront the limits of knowledge. In the first case that man must go over an 'initiatic path'.
According to Rudolf Steiner's evolutionist conception of history man would have evolved from inferior levels of conscience in relation to the holistic power of the image up to a state of rational conscience linked to the development of written language (the fragmentation of reality). The Myth of Osiris would describe this transition in the image of the death of Osiris (cut into pieces) at Biblos: the craddle of the Phoenician Alphabet. Furthermore, Hebrew prophetism would have contributed to that evolution in its opposition to politheism and ancient mantics (sybyllism, mediumnism, whichtcraft, devination, magic, astrology, etc).
Based on the principle of Goethe's metamorphosis, the 'Tragedy of Karma' would relate to an in extenso notion of language where we could distinguih two categories: the microcosmic, concerning human psyche and time; the macrocosmic referring to spirit and universal space. In its macrocosmic acception, Steiner distinguishes what he calls 'celestial writing', capable of being red by ancient initiates like the Three Kings (magi) of the Christian tradition. In some of his cycles of conferences such as the one concerning the Holly Grial Steiner develops the question of a cosmic christian ritual. [17]
Allways according to Steiner, man would be intrinsically united to the cosmic Whole body-soul-spirit. That is how the living or affective experience of the man conscient of his position in that Whole would naturally lead him toward the revelation of ternary reality. [18] The opposite approach, rationalist abstraction, would tend to separate man from universal nature to isolate him in the material rapports among the phenomena and to distance him from the balance that he must establish between the opposite poles of the cosmic reality.
posted by the captain at 6:50 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home