3 Comments
User's avatar
Vee97's avatar

When you say, "not the form itself, but the dynamic process by which form is acquired." and then "In art, the Apollonian appears as order, harmony, measure, and restraint. Because it possesses these characteristics, Apollonian art tends towards displaying a great measure of technical skill and tends to portray luminous idealizations or images of perfection." and subsequently for Dionysus as well, how is it that a dynamic process can assume a definite form? Is it that the Apollonian and Dionysian are the processes that lead to these definite forms and these forms are actually something else that's not them? In this way, we could predicate symbolism of them? Or is that beginning clause not meant to restrict the Apollonian from having access to definite forms? Or, within that affirmation, is there some sort of Heraclitean presupposition?

Expand full comment
Autistocrates's avatar

There is certainly a Heraclitean presupposition here - the world is never still. Under such a paradigm, a process is a definite form - the Apollonian is always a structuring force, the Dionysian always a force which defies and transcends structure, the Hermetic always a state of transitioning, and the three are always present within every moment.

Expand full comment
Griss Twist's avatar

Great article! I enjoyed it very much!

Expand full comment