Poetry, Beauty, and Contemplation: The Complete Aesthetics of Jacques Maritain

Introduction

1 Introduction \ At the heart of any great philosophical system there is . . . a very simple yet inexhaustible vision or insight. —Jacques Maritain Jacques Maritain (1882–1973) is arguably the most significant disciple of St.Thomas Aquinas in the twentieth century. Although he made many important contributions to several different areas of philosophy, his philosophy of art is especially noteworthy. Unfortunately, this aspect of the French Catholic philosopher’s thought is often overlooked or underappreciated by those who miss the richness and depth of insight that his philosophy of art possesses because they do not have a sufficient background in the philosophy of St.Thomas. Lacking a familiarity with Aquinas’s conceptual framework, they are susceptible to misunderstanding the context of Maritain’s thought, especially since the comprehension of his specialized uses of several key terms requires a basic foundation in Thomist philosophy. And finally, there also are those who may dismiss or disregard Maritain’s aesthetics because they may have an a priori prejudice against thinkers who philosophize in the tradition of St.Thomas. Regardless of the reasons for this oversight and underappreciation, this book intends to address these deficiencies. Indeed, the essential claim of this book is that Maritain’s philosophy of art is much more significant and original than many philosophers, aestheticians, and those generally interested in art might realize. By discussing Maritain’s youth (which contributed to his unique suitability as an insightful philosopher of art), his philosophical background and early influences , the metaphysical and epistemological context of his thought, his own creative insights, and a reconstruction of an undeveloped aspect 2 [ Introduction of his aesthetics, this study provides ample evidence of the originality and significance of Maritain’s aesthetics. Before we investigate Maritain’s philosophy specifically, we first begin by discussing some broad and general philosophical principles. It was Aristotle after all who pointed out that fruitful philosophical dialogue needs mutually agreed-upon first principles as undisputed starting points. Accordingly, the subject of this book—a complete exposition of Maritain’s philosophy of art—commences with a reflection on the metaphysical principles that concern nothing less than the whole universe. This is no doubt an ambitious undertaking. Fortunately , a book whose title suggests a similar ambition serves as a useful point of departure. In the title of his masterful A Short History of Nearly Everything, science writer Bill Bryson proposes a very presumptuous project indeed .1 And remarkably, within the book’s limitations, he nearly succeeds . Written in a popular, readable style, Bryson recounts the various stories and anecdotes that make up the history of the various fields of experimental science: physics, geology, chemistry, paleoanthropology, astronomy, and biology. Despite the hyperbole of his title, however, of course he does not really discuss “nearly everything.” Nonetheless, given his fundamentally materialist view of the universe, Bryson would feel that his title is sufficiently justified since, for him, the various sciences are at the foundation of nearly everything else that his history does not cover, subjects like philosophy, theology, the arts, religion, economics, and the various social sciences. Bryson could easily defend his book’s title by pointing out that, regardless of whatever field one may wish to explore and explain, no inquiry can hope to be successful unless its basic principles are compatible with the truths of these physical sciences. Bryson’s point is compelling. One pertinent example should suffice. If it is true that a fruitful discussion in aesthetics or epistemology requires a sound underlying theory about human nature, Bryson rightly would argue that this theory of 1. Bill Bryson, A Short History of Nearly Everything (New York: Broadway Books, 2003). Introduction \ 3 human nature must itself be consistent with the truths of the relevant sciences of biology, anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, and so forth. And yet, we submit that herein lies the flaw of Bryson’s assumption . To maintain, correctly, that the truths of the physical sciences are essential for a full understanding of human nature does not automatically lead to the conclusion that they alone explain human nature and the uniqueness of human behavior. In other words, the claim that the human genetic, material makeup may be “necessary and sufficient” for the explanation of human uniqueness (what in this case would constitute a materialist reductionism) is different from the claim that this anatomy and physiology may be “necessary but not sufficient” for its explanation. Thus, to say that sound science provides necessary explanations of...