This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
My wife found this for me on Wikipedia. Also, the Australian painter John Peter Russell owned a van Gogh painting of three pairs of shoes. See Anne Galbally, 2008, A remarkable Friendship: Vincent van Gogh and John Peter Russell, Melbourne University Publishing. The three pairs of shoes to be seen on the Internet do not quite amount to a still-life composition. All you get is a triple ‘portrait’; this is contextless as a function of the close-up view.
For my own part, I am extremely interested in the interface, the edge-to-edge-ness of literature, the fine arts and the philosophy. So, the conflation of negative space and ‘nothingness’ almost appeals to me—almost. However, if I gave in too far, I would have to read—much of—Heidegger as poetic rather than as philosophical. He might not have objected to that.
I have somewhere a banknote from the Irish Republic with a picture of Duns Scotus on it. There were none of these when—‘inscape’—Hopkins lived in Dublin. Scotus was, we Irish insist, Irish. Hopkins liked Duns Scotus, but not the Irish. To be an utter individual ‘incommunicable’ in the scholastic sense is essentially to be Irish. Essentially, I readily concede, to be—any—human being.
Mackinlay and I are using different editions of ‘The Origins of the Work of Art’ essay (but the same translation though ‘farmer’s shoes’ seems to have replaced ‘peasant shoes’). The edition which Mackinlay uses—and which I once marked up in a moderately genial way—I have mislaid. So, I bought Basic Writings: Martin Heidegger (Revised and expanded edition) ed. David Farrell Krell, London & New York, Routledge (etc.) 1995, cf pp. 139–212; I have, as my previous essay indicated, much cooled from my once almost cheerful reading of Heidegger’s—still seminal—work on the Work of Art. That he ever explained the ‘Origin’ of works of art I never believed, even when I, still, enjoyed his essay on the topic.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Endnote
The epigraph is from ‘The Book of Books: the making of “Mimesis” ’, by Arthur Krystal, in The New Yorker, December 9, 2013, pp. 83–88, see p. 84c. Krystal combines two quotations from an Auerbach source which I have not sighted.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hutchings, P. A Note on ‘Heidegger’s Temple: How Truth Happens when Nothing is Portrayed’, by Shane Mackinlay, in Sophia 49, No.4 (2010): 499–507. SOPHIA 53, 145–150 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-014-0421-5
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-014-0421-5