R. G. Collingwood:
Collingwood Differs with Tolstoy in Three Major
Ways
Jenefer Robinson[1]
on Collingwood
(At
least) 3 ways of Expressing in Art
Three Problems with
Collingwood Account of Expressive Theory
Paradox of Fiction: An Inconsistent Triad
R. G. Collingwood’s
Expressive Theory of Art
Collingwood, R. G.
(1938) Principles of Art (
Robin
George Collingwood (February 22, 1889 –
January 9, 1943)
Collingwood
is an Expressive Theorist with respect to the nature of art so there is an
affinity between him and Tolstoy.
Nevertheless, Collingwood held that Tolstoy is gravely mistaken about
the nature of expression. Essentially,
Tolstoy got the phenomenology of expression wrong according to Collingwood and
as a result misconstrued the expressive project, it's process and virtues. According to Collingwood, first we “feel,”
then we try to discern what we feel.
Note: This seems to be
better supported by cognitive science.
The idea being that we have an affective (non-cognitive) response and it
is only through the process of successive cognitive appraisals and reappraisals
that we come to know what the response was a response to and what it was that
we are/were feeling.
Hence,
it’s not…
“A tiger? …Agh!”
rather
it’s…
“Agh! …A tiger!”
Collingwood differs with Tolstoy in three major
ways:
i. Problem: This
raises the question of whether we are creating the emotion or articulating
it.
Think of it this way, the clay is an amorphous
blob until it is extruded and it is the extruding that gives it its shape. Does the act of “expressing” give the emotion
its shape?
Contra
Tolstoy and “The Arousal Theory of Expression,” Collingwood claims should the
artist indeed attempt to produce a (general) emotion in his audience, this is
the very opposite of art as it requires and relies on a
foreknowledge of an emotion of a general kind and thus overlooks the
true individual nature of expression.
“Thus
if the activity of art is the expressing of emotions, the reader is an artist as
well as the writer. There is no
distinction of kind between the artist and the audience.” (My emphasis)
a.
Precise
articulation as to what “expression of emotions” really is (requires clearer
understanding of emotions specifically cognitive or non-cognitive?).
Jenefer Robinson[2] on
Collingwood
The
expression of emotion is not merely a skill.
Different
than betrayal (does not individuate)
To
express requires:
a. one is first conscious (excitement)
b. then does something (express)
c. this brings it to self-consciousness
(difference in the phenomenological quality, according to Collingwood, one
finds the “helplessness lightened[3]”)
-not
naming (labeling- locating within a general category)
-not
describing (“I am feeling anger.”)
-not
arousal of emotion (contra Tolstoy because you can’t know in advance)
Uses
:expression” as a technical term:
To
say “I love you Freddy.” is not an expression (in his technical sense).
It
is only because we express the emotion in words that we know how we feel.
Robinson
suggests the Collingwood is right both phenomenologically and from the
perspective of Cognitive Science.
Shelly’s
To a Skylark characterizes the world
as it appears (is) to the speaker thus expressing, but also directly
articulating the ideas of the poet.
-
physiological responses inform others (and self) what the (general) nature of
the appraisal is.
Might
also express through art- but this would be a very different process. Rather than reduce the experience to that of
a general kind, we detail the experience in all its uniqueness. Here we are detailing and articulating an
emotional process. (i.e. THIS longing
versus “longing in general.” We are
seeking to express a specific longing as experienced by a particular person at
a particular time for a particular thing, etc.)
(At
least) 3 ways of Expressing in Art
1.
show how the world appears to X
2.
what the thoughts of X are
3.
the action tendencies of X
Two fold ambiguity in
this theory;
1.
Is the act of expression one of articulating the pre-existing emotion
or constructing
and emotion (forming something that did not previously exist)?
2.
Is the expression the product of the
expressive act or the process of the
expressive act itself?
Thus
Collingwood’s Theory could in fact be one of 4:
|
|
Expression
is accomplished in the Process/activity. |
Expression
is accomplished in the Product. |
|
The
Artist Discovers what he was feeling through the expressive act. |
1. |
2. |
|
The
Artist Constitutes what he was feels though the expressive act. |
3. |
4. |
3.
If there is no independent criterion of success, how could one (even the artist
himself) know when the act of expression has been successful?
Collingwood claims it is when the vague feeling
of oppression is or is not alleviated.
Paradox
of Fiction: An Inconsistent
Triad:
I am not emotionally moved by stories I know to
be false.
When I engage fiction as fiction, I know the
stories to be false.
When I engage fiction as fiction, I am,
sometimes, emotionally moved.
[1] Jenefer Mary Robinson is an American philosopher, author and emerita professor of philosophy at the University of Cincinnati. She writes on aesthetics, philosophy of psychology, philosophy of mind and theory of emotions.
[2] Jenefer Mary Robinson is an American philosopher, author and emerita professor of philosophy at the University of Cincinnati. She writes on aesthetics, philosophy of psychology, philosophy of mind and theory of emotions.
[3] One thinks of the Anna Nalick song from years ago “Breath” where the narrator says:
2 AM and I'm still awake, writing a song
If I get it all down on paper, it's no longer inside of me
Threatening the life it belongs to
And I feel like I'm naked in front of the crowd
'Cause these words are my diary screaming out loud
And I know that you'll use them however you want to