Thursday 17 April 2014

Diderot Diddles Dialogue

'Despite the official Vile Arts' line on the enlightenment (it inevitably led to both fascism and the corporate takeover of culture), today's guest has been revivified from the era of the philosophes. Denis Diderot wrote a book that stated the necessary conditions for creativity - sadly, his dictum that 'he who needs rules will never get far' is rather negated by the rules he then describes. However, it is a good place to begin today's discussion. Denis, can you tell us about Rameau's Nephew?'

'Thank you, Gareth. It's a dialogue between myself, a philosopher and a cheeky ruffian called Rameau. It is what you might call an ontological representation of a mental reality.'

'It is actually what Professor Boden might call it, in the chapter after the one I'm ripping off for this post. What I feel is that the two characters represent different aspects of the human psyche: the rational and the emotional.'

'It is exactly that. Elsewhere, I remark on the paradox of theatre - it is a lie that tells the truth. The actor pretends, the audience pretend that the actor is not pretending and so learns a truth. Here, I leave unresolved another interior tension, between the passions - the romantic sensibility, if you will - and the intellect - the more classical mode of thinking.'

'You might not give an answer to which one is right, but by using the dialectical form, you are situating your work in the classical tradition, like Plato. This implies that the intellect is necessary even to frame the conflict. So, you give implicit victory to the philosopher.'

'But look again. What is a dialogue but an argument. And is not argument the very domain of passions?'

'Interestingly, I see a parallel between Rameau's Nephew and the ancient Hindu myth of Shiva and Shakti. Shiva is like Rameau - naughty, lower-class, feckless. And Shakti is the householder, patiently awaiting the return of her passionate lover.'

'Yes. But that is religion. I am an academic.'

With thanks to The Concept of Dialogue by Magnus Florin, Bo Goranzon and Per Sallstrom.

No comments :

Post a Comment