Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

On Moral Movement and Moral Vision: The Last Supper in Russian Debates

On Moral Movement and Moral Vision: The Last Supper in Russian Debates I. The Last Supper: Stereoscopes versus Stereotypes The writing of this essay was prompted by several themes (or grievances) that have been central to art theory and art criticism in recent years: first, a general lament that moral vision is no longer possible in the absence of verbal commentary; second, uneasiness about the new kind of totalizing stygmata that visuality consciously assumes—and the trickery to which it supposedly resorts—in order to break free from logocentric confines and postmodern slippages; and, finally, complaints about the postmodern viewer’s inability to be moved by art. In addition to these theoretical concerns, this essay was also inspired by the resumption of the so-called “Last Supper debate” as a result of the recently completed restoration of Leonardo’s mural in Milan.2 All of these seemingly unrelated problems connect most powerfully if we examine the problem of representing the Eucharist in religious art. Drawing on the theology of vision and various aesthetic ideologies, this essay discusses the poorly known Russian contribution to the “Last Supper debate”: a Russian tradition in which, originally, the icon itself is the Eucharist and the flesh of the word, and which also assumes that vision is an informed emotional-volitional act, http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Comparative Literature Duke University Press

On Moral Movement and Moral Vision: The Last Supper in Russian Debates

MEDZHIBOVSKAYA, INESSA
Comparative Literature , Volume 56 (1) – Jan 1, 2004
Download PDF
31 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/on-moral-movement-and-moral-vision-the-last-supper-in-russian-debates-1LkswX9PYf

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Duke University Press
Copyright
Copyright 2004 by University of Oregon
ISSN
0010-4124
eISSN
1945-8517
DOI
10.1215/-56-1-23
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

I. The Last Supper: Stereoscopes versus Stereotypes The writing of this essay was prompted by several themes (or grievances) that have been central to art theory and art criticism in recent years: first, a general lament that moral vision is no longer possible in the absence of verbal commentary; second, uneasiness about the new kind of totalizing stygmata that visuality consciously assumes—and the trickery to which it supposedly resorts—in order to break free from logocentric confines and postmodern slippages; and, finally, complaints about the postmodern viewer’s inability to be moved by art. In addition to these theoretical concerns, this essay was also inspired by the resumption of the so-called “Last Supper debate” as a result of the recently completed restoration of Leonardo’s mural in Milan.2 All of these seemingly unrelated problems connect most powerfully if we examine the problem of representing the Eucharist in religious art. Drawing on the theology of vision and various aesthetic ideologies, this essay discusses the poorly known Russian contribution to the “Last Supper debate”: a Russian tradition in which, originally, the icon itself is the Eucharist and the flesh of the word, and which also assumes that vision is an informed emotional-volitional act,

Journal

Comparative Literature – Duke University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2004

There are no references for this article.