Louie,
"...the dynamically sublime confronts the subject with the sheer power o=
f nature rather than its magnitude. Experiencing nature's power as fearful =
without actually falling prey to fear, the subject discovers its superiorit=
y to nature =96 its freedom. That is, the subject is recalled to its supers=
ensible destiny as a moral being precisely by being exposed to its sensory =
vulnerability. The determination of the self by exterior forces gives way t=
o its determination from within, heteronomy to autonomy. With the dynamical=
ly sublime, in particular, philosophy seeks to master terror =96 the menace=
that Derrida locates at the limits of philosophical mastery." T
This academic text explains my understanding of sublime in Kant. It is =
not to embelish nature this is the beautiful not the sublime.To discover ou=
r own freedom, to make the way from heteronomy to autonomy and finaly to "m=
aster terror", I think the way is in nature because it is in sublime as Der=
rida explains.
regards,
Jos=E9
--- In Louie <> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> Perhaps it was unclear and I don't mean to derail the thread but I was
> replying to Jos=E9 who brought up the Kantian notion of the sublime. What=
I
> meant was that the sublime is quite a strange idea to mention in the
> context of a nature recordists group as Kant believed that in order for
> humans to fully appreciate the sublime (all examples of which are typical=
ly
> natural; seeing and hearing the ocean for instance), we have to filter wh=
at
> he understood as nature's terrifying elements (the 'wild, crude and
> repulsive') and re-present them in a form we could appreciate as beautifu=
l.
> I'm not sure if that is how people here see their role as recordists...
>
> Also, I was mixing up this thread with the other one (new soundscapes and
> realism), my mistake.
>
> Louie.
>
>
>
|