A leading Polish philosopher of the 20th century, Roman Ingarden is principally renowned in Western culture for his work in aesthetics and the theory of literature. Jeff Mitscherling demonstrates, in this extensive work, how Ingarden's thought constitutes a major contribution to the more fundamental fields of ontology and metaphysics. Unparalleled in existing literature, Mitscherling's comprehensive survey of Ingarden's philosophy will give the reader an informed introduction to this major work of phenomenological analysis.
In these studies Roman Ingarden investigates the nature and mode of being of four kinds of art works: the musical work, the picture, the architectural work, and the film. He establishes that the work of art is a purely intentional object but considers also its connections to the real world. By analyzing a work of art in its "constitutive heterogeneous strata," Ingarden demonstrates that a work of art will reveal, when examined in the appropriate way, its own inherent structure. Further, he shows that in consequence of the art work's structure, we must distinguish between the work itself and the concretizations of it by the listener or viewer. Ingarden elaborates upon the conception of concretization which he present in The Literary Work of Art and applies it to music and visual art. He also employs the concept of aspect to clarify the ontic structure of these art works and the distinction between the concretization of the work and the work itself. The distinction between the work's concretization - effectuated in the mental experiences of the listener or viewer - and the work itself serves to help Ingarden confirm and account for the work's intersubjective identity. The problem of aesthetic value, Ingarden maintains, can be fruitfully treated only after the ontic structure of art work has been clarified. His primary concern in Ontology of the Work of Art is to ascertain and describe that structure and the mode of existence of works of art. In addition, he offers several discussions of aesthetic value, showing in the m the connections between questions of aesthetic value and the structure of the work of art.
This is the complete and critical translation into English of Controversy over the Existence of the World by the Polish phenomenologist Roman Ingarden (1893-1970), student and critic of Husserl. Volume I of his three-volume opus magnum offers a fundamental ontological analysis of the modes of being of various types of objects.
Historically, phenomenology began in Edmund Husserl’s theory of mathematics and logic, went on to focus for him on transcendental rst philosophy and for others on metaphysics, philosophical anthropology, and theory of interpretation. The c- tinuing focus has thus been on knowledge and being. But if one began without those interests and with an understanding of the phenomenological style of approach, one might well see that art and aesthetics make up the most natural eld to be approached phenomenologically. Contributions to this eld have continually been made in the phenomenological tradition from very early on, but, so to speak, along the side. (The situation has been similar with phenomenological ethics. ) A great deal of thought about art and aesthetics has nevertheless accumulated during a century and a handbook like the present one is long overdue. The project of this handbook began in conversations over dinner in Sepp’s apa- ment in Baden-Baden at one evening of the hot European summer in the year 2003. As things worked out, he knew more about whom to ask and how much space to allocate to each entry and Embree knew more about how to conduct the inviting, preliminary editing, and prodding of contributors who were late returning their criticized drafts and copyedited entries and was able to invest the time and other resources from his endowed chair. That process took longer than anticipated and there were additional unfortunate delays due to factors beyond the editors’s control.
The Phenomenology of Aesthetic Experience (Fr. Ph nom nologie de l'exp rience esth tique) was first published in 1953. In the first of four parts, Dufrenne distinguishes the "aesthetic object" from the "work of art." In the second, he elucidates types of works of art, especially music and painting. He devotes his third section to aesthetic perception. In the fourth, he describes a Kantian critique of aesthetic experience. A perennial classic in the SPEP series, the work is rounded out by a detailed "Translator's Foreword" especially helpful to readers in aesthetics interested in the context and circumstances around which the original was published as well as the phenomenological background of the book.
This long-awaited translation of Das literarische Kunstwerk makes available for the first time in English Roman Ingarden's influential study. Though it is inter-disciplinary in scope, situated as it is on the borderlines of ontology and logic, philosophy of literature and theory of language, Ingarden's work has a deliberately narrow focus: the literary work, its structure and mode of existence. The Literary Work of Art establishes the groundwork for a philosophy of literature, i.e., an ontology in terms of which the basic general structure of all literary works can be determined. This "essential anatomy" makes basic tools and concepts available for rigorous and subtle aesthetic analysis.
Recently, scholars in a variety of disciplines--including philosophy, film and media studies, and literary studies--have become interested in the aesthetics, definition, and ontology of the screenplay. To this end, this volume addresses the fundamental philosophical questions about the nature of the screenplay: What is a screenplay? Is the screenplay art--more specifically, literature? What kind of a thing is a screenplay? Nannicelli argues that the screenplay is a kind of artefact; as such, its boundaries are determined collectively by screenwriters, and its ontological nature is determined collectively by both writers and readers of screenplays. Any plausible philosophical account of the screenplay must be strictly constrained by our collective creative and appreciative practices, and must recognize that those practices indicate that at least some screenplays are artworks.
