In Jane Ellen Harrisons, “Ancient Art and Ritual” she discusses the connection between ritual and art. She writes, “Ancient art and ritual are not only closely connected, not only do they mutually explain and illustrate each other, but, as we shall presently find, they actually arise out of a common human impulse” (Harrison, 18). Art and ritual are similar in that they both contain an element of imitation. Art and ritual arise out of the “desire to recreate an emotion, not to reproduce an object” (Harrison, 26).
“We must not only utter emotion, we must represent it, that is, we must in some way reproduce or imitate or express the thought which is causing us emotion” (Harrison, 34). From this I can grasp that the common human impulse (which art and ritual arise from) is emotion. But in order to create art we must not only feel something, but we must react to it. As humans we desire to recapture the feelings of previous positive experiences. So it seems to me that the motivation behind art and ritual lies in the desire to feel “that way” again.
Harrison goes on to differentiate between a “rite” and a thing done. A rite is characterized by collectivity, emotional tension and intensity. In order to support her point, Harrison uses the example of eating (and digesting dinner). Eating dinner alone is a thing done, however it is not a rite. Eating dinner with your family may very well constitute a ritual (rite) if the feelings expressed are common to all those involved. What does Harrison mean by intensity? Is it the intensity of the emotions felt in a ritual? Or the intense connection between the participants of the ritual?
No comments:
Post a Comment