IVAN FOCHT ON ONTOLOGY OF ART

U radu se pokušalo što obuhvatnije izložiti osnovne postavke filozofije umjetnosti Ivana Fochta. S obzirom na nepostojanje opširnijih monografskih radova o Fochtovu filozofskom djelu, nastojalo se njegova estetička stajališta dovesti u vezu te usporediti s relevantnim stajalištima hrvatske i europske estetičko-filozofske misli. Stoga se očekivani znanstveni doprinos prvenstveno odnosi na uspostavu interpretacijskih osnova kako za buduće vrednovanje, tako i za buduća tumačenja Fochtova djela. U metodskom smislu rad počiva na analitici izvornih Fochtovih tekstova, ali i odgovarajuće klasične i recentne sekundarne literature. Iz razmatranja koja su u radu provedena proizašla su četiri bitna i nosiva određenja Fochtove ontologije umjetnosti. Prvo: ispostavilo se da je Fochtova estetika u metodološkom pogledu objektivizam, tj. da polazi od forme i strukture estetskog predmeta (formalna estetika). Na pozadini ideje o slojevitoj strukturi estetskog predmeta (npr. N. Hartmann, R. Ingarden) Focht izvodi svoj nacrt strukture prema kojemu estetski predmet ima tri osnovna plana (materijalno-fizikalni, predmetno-prikazivački i duhovno-metafizički). Drugo: u ontološkom pogledu Fochtova estetika zagovara esencijalizam, odnosno stav da estetske forme prethode egzistenciji estetskog predmeta. Polazeći od idealnog karaktera umjetnosti Focht ne prihvaća, dokraja, fenomenologijsko razlikovanje idealnog estetskog predmeta i realnog umjetničkog djela, jer smatra da je moment modalnosti presudno određen upravo idealnim karakterom umjetnosti. Treće: Fochtova estetika prožeta je gnoseološkim realizmom koji polazi od stava da estetske forme postoje objektivno, odnosno, da nisu proizvod svijesti estetskog subjekta. Iz gnoseološkog realizma proizlazi i shvaćanje da estetski predmet bitno uvjetuje estetski akt. Tako bi se moglo reći da Focht u gnoseologijskom pogledu zastupa jedan osebujan spoj platonizma, tj. fenomenologije, i dijalektičkog materijalizma. Četvrto: Fochtova je ontologija umjetnosti zasnovana na ontološkom monizmu i gnoseološkom dualizmu. Ontološki monizam je najočitiji u konstitutivnoj analizi estetskog predmeta, tj. u Fochtovu nacrtu strukture umjetničkog djela. Dočim se gnoseološki dualizam na poseban način očituje u Fochtovu shvaćanju umjetničke spoznaje kao dijalektičkog odnosa subjekta i objekta. Zaključno valja napomenuti da ontologija umjetnosti Ivana Fochta sadržava teoretska dostignuća koja u cijelosti mogu podržavati sud o izvornosti njegovog pristupa estetskom fenomenu. Izlazak iz područja umjetnosti u područje prirode i prirodno lijepog, kako bi se još više približilo metafizičkom smislu identiteta materije i duha, ono je što u konačnici preostaje kao krajnji rezultat Fochtove filozofije umjetnosti. Ključne riječi: Ivan Focht, ontologija umjetnosti, estetski predmet, estetski akt, objektivacijaThe paper attempts to expound the basic postulates of Ivan Focht’s philosophy of art as comprehensively as possible. Given the absence of more extensive monographs on Focht’s philosophical work, efforts are made to correlate his aesthetic standpoints and to compare the same with relevant standpoints of both Croatian and European aesthetic-philosophical thought. Accordingly, the expected scientific contribution pertains primarily to the establishment of an interpretive basis for both the future evaluation and future interpretations of Focht’s works. Methodologically, the paper is based on an analysis of Focht’s original texts, but also on relevant classical and recent secondary literature. The author’s considerations presented in the paper have resulted in four essential and underlying designations of Focht’s ontology of art. First, it turns out that, methodologically speaking, Focht’s aesthetics is objectivism, i.e. that it sets forth from the form and structure of aesthetic objects (formal aesthetics). Drawing on the idea that the structure of aesthetic objects is layered (e.g., N. Hartmann, R. Ingarden), Focht drafts his structure scheme, according to which aesthetic objects have three basic plans (the material-physical, the objective-display, and the spiritual-metaphysical plan). Second, in ontological terms, Focht’s aesthetics advocates essentialism, i.e. the view that aesthetic forms precede the existence of aesthetic objects. Starting from the ideal character of art, Focht does not accept fully the phenomenological distinction between ideal aesthetic objects and real works of art because he believes that the moment of modality is crucially determined by exactly the ideal character of art. Third, Focht’s aesthetics is permeated by gnoseological realism which takes the position that aesthetic forms exist objectively or that they are not the product of the consciousness of aesthetic subjects. It is also from gnoseological realism that the understanding that aesthetic acts are conditioned significantly by aesthetic objects stems. Correspondingly, it could be said that, in gnoseological terms, Focht represents a distinctive amalgam of Platonism, i.e. phenomenology, and dialectical materialism. Fourth, Focht’s ontology of art is based on ontological monism and gnoseological dualism. His ontological monism is most obvious in the constitutive analysis of aesthetic objects, i.e. in Focht’s scheme of the structure of works of art, while his gnoseological dualism is revealed in a special way in Focht’s understanding of artistic cognition as a dialectic relationship between subject and object. In conclusion, it should be noted that Ivan Focht’s ontology of art contains theoretical achievements that can fully support the judgment on the authenticity of his approach to the aesthetic phenomenon. Exiting the field of art and entering the realm of nature and the naturally beautiful – so as to draw closer to the metaphysical sense of the identity of matter and spirit – is what ultimately remains as the final result of Focht’s philosophy of art

HRVATSKI PUT PREMA ERM 2: ZAŠTO, KAKO I ŠTO MOŽEMO NAUČITI OD DRUGIH ZEMALJA?

In this paper we analyze different aspects of Croatian path to the monetary union and its current readiness to join the ERM 2 mechanism. Firstly, we present and discuss costs and benefits of euro adoption. Second, we use descriptive analysis to determine Croatia’s current position in relation to convergence criteria and discuss the possible timing of Croatian accession to the ERM 2. Thirdly, we analyze experiences of two NMS peers, Slovenia and Slovakia, before and after joining ERM 2 and highlight key lessons for Croatian policy makers. As Croatia is highly euroised (high FX risk) small and open economy, strongly integrated in EA trade and financial chains, with limited possibilities of monetary policy, the benefits of euro adoption would outweigh all commonly mentioned costs. Regarding convergence criteria, the biggest obstacle of Croatian access to ERM 2 mechanism is the level of public debt but recent developments and adjustments of SGP suggest that Croatia could satisfy the adjusted fiscal criteria already in several years. Experiences of Slovenia and Slovakia show that determined steps towards the euro (primarily ERM 2) can serve as an important policy credibility anchor and put a positive pressure on policy makers to preserve internal and external stability of the country and implement various structural reforms in order to achieve convergence with the euro zone members.U ovom radu autori analiziraju različite aspekte pristupanja Hrvatske europodručju i ocjenjuju trenutačnu spremnost Hrvatske za ulazak u tečajni mehanizam ERM 2. Prvo, u radu se sažeto prikazuju potencijalni troškovi i koristi od uvođenja eura kao nacionalne valute. Drugo, koristeći metodu deskriptivne statistike, autori utvrđuju trenutačnu poziciju Hrvatske u odnosu na konvergencijske kriterije te određuju potencijalni (realističan) trenutak ulaska u tečajni mehanizam ERM 2. Treće, autori analiziraju iskustva usporedivih zemalja članica Nove Europe, Slovenije i Slovačke, prije i nakon ulaska u ERM 2 te ističu ključne pouke za nositelje politike u Hrvatskoj. Budući da je Hrvatska visoko euroizirana, mala, otvorena ekonomija, snažno integrirana u trgovinske i financijske tokove europodručja te da već ima ograničen suverenitet monetarne politike, u radu se zaključuje kako potencijalne prednosti uvođenja eura nadmašuju sve potencijalne troškove. Što se tiče konvergencijskih kriterija, najveća prepreka ulasku u ERM 2 predstavlja visoka razina javnog duga, ali nedavne izmjene Pakta o stabilnosti i rastu te uvođenje novog kriterija duga omogućavaju Hrvatskoj da zadovolji i novi kriterij duga u sljedećih nekoliko godina. Iskustva Slovenije i Slovačke pokazuju da odlučan put prema euru (prvenstveno boravak u ERM 2) može poslužiti kao važno sidro kredibiliteta ekonomske politike i potaknuti nositelje politike da očuvaju internu i eksternu stabilnost zemlje te implementiraju različite strukturne reforme kako bi ostvarili što veći stupanj konvergencije prema zemljama euro područja

Two Faces of the Monument: Politics and Practices in the Usages of the Monument to the Peasant Revolt and Matija Gubec in Gornja Stubica

Cilj je članka analizirati Spomenik Seljačkoj buni i Matiji Gupcu u Gornjoj Stubici kao materijalizirano sjećanje na prošlost konstruiranu u skladu s potrebama sadašnjosti. Spomeniku se pristupa iz perspektive ljudi koji ga na raznorodne načine koriste i oživljavaju, pri čemu je naglasak na njihovim kulturnim praksama u prostoru spomenika. Među nizom mogućih pogleda na Spomenik i izvedbe koje ga prate, autori se usmjeravaju na njegova dva lica, koja se odnose na dva povijesna trenutka, ali i dva različita modusa sjećanja. Jedno je povezano s kontekstom nastanka spomenika i njegovim komemorativnim i obljetničkim upotrebama u socijalizmu. Drugo lice dolazi do izražaja u 21. stoljeću kada se slike prošlosti utjelovljuju i uprizoruju u izvedbama oživljene povijesti.The aim of the paper is to analyze the monument to the Peasant Revolt and Matija Gubec in Gornja Stubica as materialised memory of the past constructed in relation to present-day circumstances. The monument is approached through the prism of people who use it and bring it to life in diverse ways, with the emphasis on their cultural practices and performances in the memorial space. Out of a number of potential approaches to the Monument, the authors focus on its two faces, related to two historical moments, but also two different modes of memory. One is connected with the construction of the monument and its commemorative and anniversary usages in socialism. The other is created in the 21st century, when images of the past also become embodied in living history performances

On the ethos of archivists

U radu se pokušala izvidjeti mogućnost utemeljenja arhivističkog ethosa s obzirom na značaj arhivskog gradiva kao kulturnoga dobra ili kao "svjedočanstva prošlosti" (čl. 1. Etičkog kodeksa arhivista). Ono prošlo (historijsko) se u kontekstu rada tumači kao nužni moment za identitet pojedinca, naroda i kulture, a kao ishodište umačenju koristi se Nietzscheov spis "O koristi i štetnosti historije za život". U tu svrhu poduzima se kratak osvrt na antičko (grčko) shvaćanje onog etičkog kao jedinstva prirode (fysis) i zakona (nomos) i na novovjekovno shvaćanje (Kant) autonomnosti moralnog subjekta. Kao centralni problem etike ispostavilo se pitanje razdvoja principa moraliteta i legaliteta. Zatim se daje pregled nekoliko glavnih momenata Nietzscheovog spisa s osvrtom na pojmove monumentalne, antikvarne i kritičke vrste historije. U kontekstu rada povijest se shvaća kao umijeće posredovanja kontinuiteta života koji sebe samog stvara, održava i preoblikuje na onom individualnom, tj. na pojedincu. Arhivist kao djelatnik antikvarne i u određenoj mjeri kritičke historije, tj. kao skrbnik i vrednovatelj, stoji u službi održavanja individualiteta naroda i njegove kulture (zajednice), te nastoji dati pravu mjeru sadržaja onog historijskog.Paper deals with a possibility of founding ethos of archivists, regarding significance of archives as cultural welfare, or as „a memory of the past“ (Ethical Code of archivists, art. 1). Characterization of archives as „a memory of the past“ is not clear enough. Such provision doesn\u27t make clear is it about the essential in the past of certain community or is the past assumed as a general history of the mankind. Theoretical queries in foundation of criteria for evaluation of materials worth to be preserved open questions on the purpose of preservation of archival heritage. In the context of the paper, the past (historical) is interpreted as an element necessary for identities of individuals, people, and culture. Nietzsche\u27s text About Advantage and Disadvantage of History for Life was taken as a starting point for such approach. With that purpose a short overview of antic (Greek) understanding of ethical as a unity of nature (fysis) and law (nomos) is given, same as an overview of Kant\u27s autonomy of moral subject. As a central problem of ethics emerges issue of dichotomy between principles of morality and legality. Afterwards an overview of main accents of Nietzsche\u27s study is presented, regarding notions of monumental, antiquarian, and critical history. Since the ethos of archivists is related to keeping things from the past, Nietzsche\u27s understanding of history is considered, on the background of his critics of morality. Believing into subject, who exists before doing, is for Nietzsche a key moment for dispute with traditional morality, since he recognizes in that possibility for the split emerging between thinking and doing. He understands an individuum as a final product of life which keeps continuum of life through permanent evaluation and re-evaluation of itself. Life itself exists as a will to power. Man is related to the past by his memories. From harmonized relation between historical (ability of memorizing) and un-historical (ability of forgetting) rise existence and continuation of the individual, while overcoming one historical power by another necessarily leads to illness, degradation, and disappearance. In the context of the paper, history is understood as a skill of intermediation of life\u27s continuity, in the sense in which life creates itself, keeping and redesigning itself on the individual level. Archivist, as an employee of antiquarian history, but also, in the certain sense, of critical history, i.e. as a keeper and evaluator, is in the service of preservation of people\u27s individuality and culture, trying to give real measure to the content of the historical. Archivist understood in the higher sense is not only an identity keeper of a people/a nation and its culture, but, in fact, is a keeper of truth on lifeness of life treated as a truth for itself

IVAN FOCHT ON ONTOLOGY OF ART

U radu se pokušalo što obuhvatnije izložiti osnovne postavke filozofije umjetnosti Ivana Fochta. S obzirom na nepostojanje opširnijih monografskih radova o Fochtovu filozofskom djelu, nastojalo se njegova estetička stajališta dovesti u vezu te usporediti s relevantnim stajalištima hrvatske i europske estetičko-filozofske misli. Stoga se očekivani znanstveni doprinos prvenstveno odnosi na uspostavu interpretacijskih osnova kako za buduće vrednovanje, tako i za buduća tumačenja Fochtova djela. U metodskom smislu rad počiva na analitici izvornih Fochtovih tekstova, ali i odgovarajuće klasične i recentne sekundarne literature. Iz razmatranja koja su u radu provedena proizašla su četiri bitna i nosiva određenja Fochtove ontologije umjetnosti. Prvo: ispostavilo se da je Fochtova estetika u metodološkom pogledu objektivizam, tj. da polazi od forme i strukture estetskog predmeta (formalna estetika). Na pozadini ideje o slojevitoj strukturi estetskog predmeta (npr. N. Hartmann, R. Ingarden) Focht izvodi svoj nacrt strukture prema kojemu estetski predmet ima tri osnovna plana (materijalno-fizikalni, predmetno-prikazivački i duhovno-metafizički). Drugo: u ontološkom pogledu Fochtova estetika zagovara esencijalizam, odnosno stav da estetske forme prethode egzistenciji estetskog predmeta. Polazeći od idealnog karaktera umjetnosti Focht ne prihvaća, dokraja, fenomenologijsko razlikovanje idealnog estetskog predmeta i realnog umjetničkog djela, jer smatra da je moment modalnosti presudno određen upravo idealnim karakterom umjetnosti. Treće: Fochtova estetika prožeta je gnoseološkim realizmom koji polazi od stava da estetske forme postoje objektivno, odnosno, da nisu proizvod svijesti estetskog subjekta. Iz gnoseološkog realizma proizlazi i shvaćanje da estetski predmet bitno uvjetuje estetski akt. Tako bi se moglo reći da Focht u gnoseologijskom pogledu zastupa jedan osebujan spoj platonizma, tj. fenomenologije, i dijalektičkog materijalizma. Četvrto: Fochtova je ontologija umjetnosti zasnovana na ontološkom monizmu i gnoseološkom dualizmu. Ontološki monizam je najočitiji u konstitutivnoj analizi estetskog predmeta, tj. u Fochtovu nacrtu strukture umjetničkog djela. Dočim se gnoseološki dualizam na poseban način očituje u Fochtovu shvaćanju umjetničke spoznaje kao dijalektičkog odnosa subjekta i objekta. Zaključno valja napomenuti da ontologija umjetnosti Ivana Fochta sadržava teoretska dostignuća koja u cijelosti mogu podržavati sud o izvornosti njegovog pristupa estetskom fenomenu. Izlazak iz područja umjetnosti u područje prirode i prirodno lijepog, kako bi se još više približilo metafizičkom smislu identiteta materije i duha, ono je što u konačnici preostaje kao krajnji rezultat Fochtove filozofije umjetnosti. Ključne riječi: Ivan Focht, ontologija umjetnosti, estetski predmet, estetski akt, objektivacijaThe paper attempts to expound the basic postulates of Ivan Focht’s philosophy of art as comprehensively as possible. Given the absence of more extensive monographs on Focht’s philosophical work, efforts are made to correlate his aesthetic standpoints and to compare the same with relevant standpoints of both Croatian and European aesthetic-philosophical thought. Accordingly, the expected scientific contribution pertains primarily to the establishment of an interpretive basis for both the future evaluation and future interpretations of Focht’s works. Methodologically, the paper is based on an analysis of Focht’s original texts, but also on relevant classical and recent secondary literature. The author’s considerations presented in the paper have resulted in four essential and underlying designations of Focht’s ontology of art. First, it turns out that, methodologically speaking, Focht’s aesthetics is objectivism, i.e. that it sets forth from the form and structure of aesthetic objects (formal aesthetics). Drawing on the idea that the structure of aesthetic objects is layered (e.g., N. Hartmann, R. Ingarden), Focht drafts his structure scheme, according to which aesthetic objects have three basic plans (the material-physical, the objective-display, and the spiritual-metaphysical plan). Second, in ontological terms, Focht’s aesthetics advocates essentialism, i.e. the view that aesthetic forms precede the existence of aesthetic objects. Starting from the ideal character of art, Focht does not accept fully the phenomenological distinction between ideal aesthetic objects and real works of art because he believes that the moment of modality is crucially determined by exactly the ideal character of art. Third, Focht’s aesthetics is permeated by gnoseological realism which takes the position that aesthetic forms exist objectively or that they are not the product of the consciousness of aesthetic subjects. It is also from gnoseological realism that the understanding that aesthetic acts are conditioned significantly by aesthetic objects stems. Correspondingly, it could be said that, in gnoseological terms, Focht represents a distinctive amalgam of Platonism, i.e. phenomenology, and dialectical materialism. Fourth, Focht’s ontology of art is based on ontological monism and gnoseological dualism. His ontological monism is most obvious in the constitutive analysis of aesthetic objects, i.e. in Focht’s scheme of the structure of works of art, while his gnoseological dualism is revealed in a special way in Focht’s understanding of artistic cognition as a dialectic relationship between subject and object. In conclusion, it should be noted that Ivan Focht’s ontology of art contains theoretical achievements that can fully support the judgment on the authenticity of his approach to the aesthetic phenomenon. Exiting the field of art and entering the realm of nature and the naturally beautiful – so as to draw closer to the metaphysical sense of the identity of matter and spirit – is what ultimately remains as the final result of Focht’s philosophy of art