Musicality and the Limits of Meaning in Wordsworth and Kant

Paragraph 36 (3):324-343 (2013)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I argue that the difficulty Kant encounters in evaluating music in the third Critique is caused by his problematic attempt to separate sound from meaning. Analogously, Wordsworth attempts in the Preface to divide metrical pleasure and the feeling derived from the semantic meaning of poems. In both cases, this separation can be overcome by a radical, Romantic understanding of musicality, whereby music not only participates in meaning but becomes its grounds. While this remains latent in Kant, Wordsworth's ‘Tintern Abbey’ can assert the centrality of listening to thinking, which has important implications for his poetics.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,532

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Kant, Wordsworth, and the Aesthetic Experience.Yu Liu - 1994 - Dissertation, State University of New York at Buffalo
Wordsworth's Literary Criticism.William Wordsworth - 1974 - London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Musicality: Instinct or Acquired Skill?Gary F. Marcus - 2012 - Topics in Cognitive Science 4 (4):498-512.
Kant on Possible Hope.Sidney Axinn - 2000 - The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 7:79-87.
Kant and the question of meaning.Garrath Williams - 1999 - Philosophical Forum 30 (2):115–131.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-04-20

Downloads
13 (#1,029,095)

6 months
1 (#1,470,413)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Alexander Freer
Cambridge University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Immanuel Kant and the aesthetics of music.Herbert M. Schueller - 1955 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 14 (2):218-247.
Kant on music and the hierarchy of the arts.Herman Parret - 1998 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 56 (3):251-264.

Add more references