This week, I found the Longinus reading to be particularly interesting. At first I didn’t completely agree with what he was saying. To me, the sublime could be simple and pure, whereas he says that it should not only be initially beautiful, but must also be able to maintain its beauty upon deeper analysis. Eventually, however, I realized that we actually have similar thoughts on sublimity. A dew drop for example is simple, pure and beautiful. I initially thought that seeing sublimity is something so simple meant that we weren’t in agreement, however as I began to think about the beauty of the water drop and why it was so beautiful and it’s other attributes that make is special, I saw I was wrong. Even simple things can be rather complex and therefore sublime. Water is pure, but it refracts light, shows through color, and even gives life.
Due to the fact that I see nature as so often sublime, I wish that Longinus could have included more about sublimity in other areas besides literature, but seeing how this is a part of critical theory in literature, I guess that wouldn’t have made all that much sense.
Another thing I particularly liked about Longinus was his desire for elevated diction. This was very similar to Aristotle’s definition of “exotic names.” Big words are always fun, even if sometime daunting and I thought exotic names sounded like a more exotic way of describing these words.
No comments:
Post a Comment