Note of introduction

2+2=4 is Ratio/Reason or correct. And 2+2=3 is Er-Ratio/mistake or incorrect. Is it possible Ratio/reason/correct tolerates er-Ratio/mistake/incorrect?

In Angolan (ancestral) philosophy, we find several metaphysic supports, as well as the cognitional essences of the production of ART as sache (Heidegger). The Artist António Tomas Ana – after several years of military life – structured his artistic philosophy. I called it ETONISM, the tolerant reason. What really is it … etonism? It might be the relative response of “is it possible Ratio tolerates er-Ratio?” Let’s suppose that on a peace of paper, I write down the number 9. Who ever placed in front of me will see the number 6. Isn’t it? So who, between both of us, is correct or in Ratio’s side?

Maybe we find the possible answer in Republic of Plato, chapter I and II. Plato has difficulties to define the JUSTICE because, it seems, he based his reflexion on RATIO not tolerating er-RATIO. Is it why he couldn’t satisfactorily define the JUSTICE? While Kantism reflects on the inter-subjectivity, and etonism is about intra-subjectivity.

I. ETONISM, definition

Etymologically, etonism derives from the term etona which means (in Angolan languages) (1) Reason; (2) Justice; (3) Tolerance. Our analysis will firstly be based on the António Tomas Ana artworks: painting and sculpture (Batsîkama: 2006; 2007).

In painting, we can observe three intensities of tonality:

(i) HOT intensity means, in artist’s viewpoint, dominance, property, energy, intense desire and, symbolizes, “something well-organized, well-done”:

(ii) NEUTRAL intensity marks a balance of opposite poles (Hot and Cold), the according to the artist’s codification;

(iii) COLD intensity, naturally contrary of hot, and the artist codifies “something not well-organized”.

In the sculpture, we can find:

(i) FLAT treatment indicates knowledge; a man well educated; opinion well structured (in artist’s viewpoint);

(ii) ROUGH treatment reveals the knowledge acquired without schooling; auto-didacticism (the according to the artist);

(iii) ACCIDENTAL treatment. When the artist brings with him the wood – acacia from Luanda specially – he chooses particularly the wood destroyed by insects. This part means lack of knowledge, lower/dominated class.

Angolan society – where the artist formulizes his art’s codes – we found the sequels from colonization: racism, discrimination and tribalism or other kind of separatisms. The artist seems to downsizing the co-existence of 3 antagonist “blocs” not by their convergent elements, but by the respect of their divergences. For him, the relationship between Well-educated, Not-well-educated and Not-educated has only one convergence: Human being. That’s enough.

We can understand Human Being (HOMO) by 3 ontological dimensions: I, YOU and HE. In this case, the HOMO is I (subjective) and can be WE (objective/common place). If I and WE assume the existential ontography of HOMO, HE makes bridge and permits I and WE understand the dependence of their unsatisfied subjectivity (Homo imitatvs became Homo inventis). Kant called it inter-subjectivity. Ferry thinks that might be the Hipper-subjectivity. But, in etonism way, it is illustrated as intra-subjectivity (from Homo-body, Homo-idea and Homo-will). That’s why, the necessity of destruction of “WE” and ontological comprehension of each element (I, YOU and HE) and reconstruction of them is based on the respect of their diversities, talking about I (intra-subjectivity). And, talking about WE, the reflexion conducts us to a neo-harmony.

The term etona means Reason, Justice and Tolerance. Looking for the Justice not defined in Plato’s Republic (Books I and II), we can consider Reason and Tolerance as opposite ways in conquest of JUSTICE. This is what really means etona.

In Occidental World, RATIO (Reason) seems not tolerant. Since Plato, Aristotle, Plotino… to Kant, Hume, Montesquieu … and now, the rationalism doesn’t and cannot TOLERATE its opposite: Er-RATIO. For our understanding, as we exemplified in the introduction, 2+2=4 is Ratio/Reason or correct. And 2+2=3 is Er-Ratio/mistake or incorrect. So, is it possible the Ratio/reason/correct tolerates E-Ratio/mistake/incorrect?

The term etona means (i) Reason and (ii) Tolerance in Angolan languages. António Tomas Ana so-called Etona, as painter and sculptor, expresses his desire to build a HOMO TOLERATVS, as we already exemplified it before.

Immanuel Kant created the HOMO transcendental. In his world, Ratio cannot tolerate Er-Ratio because of the position occupied by him (Homo transcendental), in epicentre of existence #reality or the World submitted in the existential reason). So, let’s ask, in this case: how explain some HOMO sleeping in Angola and dreaming some action in Greece? Kant can respond us very well in existential way: the background/experience of the HOMO construct his dream with every colour.

Etonism responds: Ontologically, HOMO seems divided in three parts: (i) material/body. This HOMO-body can speak, feels pain or joy and depends to the natural existence and can die; (ii) immaterial/idea. This HOMO-idea can feel but pain or joy means nothing to him, it is HIM who thinks and can not die. When we read “Critics of reason”, we can imagine Kant alive. Isn’t it?; (iii) will: it is not immaterial nor material. This HOMO-will can feel and confound its feelings without HOMO-idea. My brain advises me about the danger (measured by HOMO-body) and it depends to my HOMO-will before any ACT (hiding from this threat, or combat it, for example). Isn’t it? In this case, HOMO seems constructed by 3 different mini-Homos and, as we can understand, their harmony depends to the rich divergences: one needs other and vice-versa. This is to say these mini-Homos construct the Homo-individual (single PERSON).

As we can see, Homo-idea is RATIO and the Homo-will no-Ratio. In the other hand, Homo-idea can think and obeys to the laws of nature: it can only think about some thing realizable because it originates from the existential supports. Meanwhile, the Homo-will can not think, but it strengths the process of action. Love, for example, depends to the Homo-will. We call it no-Ratio not because is mistake, but because ratio means nothing for it. It comes from the essential supports. Finally, we have Homo-material. This one depends to the Homo-idea and Homo-will. Also called Homo-body, it instrumentalizes the pain (on the neck), the love (sexual relation) because it’s from the existential and essential birth. Curiously, Homo-body interprets Ratio and er-Ratio in existential ways with rationalism. Intra-subjectively, the Homo is based on Ratio and no-Ratio. The idea of er-Ratio seems to begin in the disagreement of Mid-Age heritage (Faith, dogmatism, …) and Descartes and Cartesians opted the rational experience as the unique way of acceptability of Intelligenzia. Each of us – all of us as Homo – has Ratio and no-Ratio. The circumstantial exigencies obliged the Human being (Homo) to use the rationalism as unique cognitional instrument. With etonism, the no-Rationalism and the Rationalism made Homo Toteratvs.

These are the areas of HOMO TOLERATVS. In this way, RATIO can TOLERATES Er-RATIO because, not only of their different outlook (angle), but because they fundamentally understand the essence existence by TOLERANCE.

II. HOMO AESTHETICVS OF LUC FERRY

Luc Ferry – in his Homo Eastheticvs – supports the subjectivity as the ways of creation of the World/Culture and not to merely imitate the Nature. In other hands, Ferry is one of the continuator of Kant, centralizing the relationships between individuality, the nature and the determinism (Pierobon: 2005, pp.315-322)… and “affirms the transcendence of ideas or cultural and moral values against the notion that a man is inserted in the same link which manages the natural phenomenon” (Ferry: 2003, p.40).

The notion of mimesis by Kant celebrates the invention of the World by simples wish on the Nature. Luc Ferry is trying to demonstrate – in the other hand – how the Hipper-subjectivity makes the World. The individual World of HOMO.

The democracy seems based on the necessity of the HOMO as Social-being and recognizes his role in his existence contributing in the “Common-place” with his marks. As we come just to know, HOMO-individual as harmony of Homo-idea, Homo-will and Homo-body, is in constant recreation: Homo-inventis. Walter Benjamin thinks that this Homo-inventis can finish his [individual] World for aesthetics reasons. It’s true, in understanding the Pop Art, Contemporary Art, Body Art, Surrealism, Abstractionism … That why Arthur Danto wrote After the End of Art.

Considering the position of Luc Ferry in congruence with etonism, permit me to introduce some considerations of “Organic State” of Friedrich Ratzel/Kjeller. They consider the points of sensibility as source of disestablishment of society: we underline (a) nationality, (b) boundary. The nationality and the boundaries, both inventions of Homo aestheticvs are the closed criteria of tranquillity of each State. Unfortunately the nationality and boundary are porosity where comes from the disestablishment: (a) son of American and Chinese born in Africa… for example; (b) the source of war and trouble in the World are from the boundaries: (i) physical; (ii) cultural; (iii) politic; (iv) economic; (anthropological/social; etc. We have boundaries everywhere. The Homo-inventis who made these “things” created aesthetically his World, and of course, can finish with it in aesthetical reasons (Benjamin: 2003). In the same way he can save it up.

Etonism tries to exhibit the intra-subjectivity of HOMO, showing his nationality and boundaries. The nationality of HOMO is sensible because of its porosity (born in Islamic country from Christian parent and educated by Japanese ways and living in Africa society: compare with the case of angolanized painter Neves e Sousa, A., ...Da minha África e do Brasil que eu vi… Luanda: Machado Gravador, S/D.), as well as his boundaries: Homo-body, Homo-idea and Homo-will. The HOMO needs a good neighbouring of these mini-Homo for his intern tranquillity, and can safely survive accepting the diversity of his nature (nationality, in this case).

III. MUNTU-ANGOLAN METAPHYSIC AND MIMESIS

We call muntu-Angola the unity between populations of Angola country: Côkwe, Ambûndu, Kôngo and Umbûndu. In this case when we say muntu-angolan people, it means, these are four main populations. This unity seems to be anthropological, linguistic and philosophical.

We are going to point out the concepts of mimesis: being and truth. First of all, we trying to define and approach the muntu-angolan semantics about art the according to Occidental historiography: art: ociwa (Umbûndu/Côkwe), waa mbote (kikôngo), ciwa or waba (Kimbûndu) and philosophy of art: ocisolakuliso wa ociwa (Umbûndu/Côkwe), luzolakudisu lwa waa mbote (kikôngo), solakulikisu ciwa (Kimbûndu). After that, we compare the literature existing about mimesis in Occidental World to the no-literature able to exist in muntu-angolan case. Aesthetics in muntu-angolan expression can be called ndungu or lûngu (Batsîkama: 2010).

Angolan social tissue is fractionated, doesn’t adequately fight against exclusion and seems fragile in the challenge of globalization. Some scholars think that it might be the heritage from the nationalism/independence (Batsîkama: 2010). Other ones believe that the lack of art or scientific advises can be pointed as second reason of exclusions in Angolan society (Paulo de Carvalho: 2009). This reflexion tries to present the art as potential contribution in “peacing” (making peace) of the spirits. This process was the way that Angolan Ancestors used in the past (Kandjimbo: 1997, pp134-143). And, it can be possible to continue to do the same, actually. That’s why we were obliged to compare and combine the muntu-angolan perspective with Occidental historiography, and our effort stays long from the IAfrocentric Idea (Asante: 1987; Bidima: 1993).

In Hegel tradition, mimesis seems to be truth and being in exalting the corrective imitation. The Greek sculpture can serve as model (Donohue: 2005). Nelson Goodmann and Arthur Danto are different in this viewpoint (see the eventual reason in Pinson: 2005): the first one thinks that imitation presents epistemological problems as source of art; the last one renews the Aristotle’s mimesis in two senses: (1) imitation is limited and points out two imitations: (a) imitation-as and (b) pseudo/imitation; (2) truth constructs itself and its dynamics nature can depend to God (Leibniz), or not, as in the mathematics: 2+2+4 not depend to God.

We present 10 sculptures and 10 paintings divided in 3 groups showing that:

1) The mimesis might be Truth and Existence: see the pictures sculpt#1, , sculpt#6, (Verly: 1955), compare with the theories of Goodman, Dewey and Bilolo, paint#2 e paint#7;

2) The mimesis seems the embodiment of truth and existence in false imitation: see pictures paint#3 (compare to Devish: 1972), sculpt#4, sculpt#5 (compare to Biebyuck: 1973) and paint#8 (Danto and Dikie);

3) The mimesis belongs to two separated Worlds: (1) real and imitated: see picture #9 (Aristotle, Hegel and Bidima); (2) unreal and pos-existed or pseudo/existed in culture (see Paulme: 1956; Adorno, Umberto Eco and Gaudibert): see the picture #10.

The process of creation in sculpture obeys to several dimensions of aesthetical appreciation. The masks from some rites or ceremonies in the museum present two orders. (1) Before to be classified in the museum scientifically, the mask was classified in the liturgical supports in traditional religion with other kind of museum. In both case, the essence of the object (Sache – Heidegger) as art is only differentiated in science and religion, or yet, in scientific paradigm and popular/religious paradigm. (2) Pensador (Thinker) or palanca negra are both the national symbol of Angola. The first was derived from the Cokwe ceremonies and embodies the Auguste Rodin’s literature about his Thinker (Néret: 1994). In this case this imitation seems function out of mimesis as Danto articulated in After The End of Art. Palanca (kind of animal) and imitated (Hegel) because it exists (Aristotle) but, in Angolan credo; the image of palanca negra symbolizes the force (palanca ≠ force) but when Angolan people admit they are palanca, metaphorically means that they’re thinking strong as well as palanca (Goodman, Dewey and Bilolo).

The ancient sculpture of Egypt explains to us that mimesis acts on the imitation corrective and, in the same time, imagination pseudo-existed as culture (Basiba: 1977, pp.43. 47-50; Willet: 2002, pp. 34-44). We have an example in Senegal with the poesy of Leopold Sedar Senhor (Kotchy: 2000): there is not opposition in African Culture, but juxtaposition, said Senghor. In the Contemporary theatre of Ivory Coast the catharsis obeys in the pseudo-imitation/existence supports (Koffi: 1997, pp.21-24). The exhibition of Etona tries to explain how the sculpture (art in 3 dimensions) expresses 3 ways of mimesis and encourages, maybe, new systematization for its well-understanding. Also, he’s trying show us how his painting is three mini-paintings in spite of to be mono or plural-chromatic.

Firstly, mimesis is not presented here as imitation and being. And secondly, the mimesis presented needs collateral explanations (see the explication of each artwork). And finally, we are in front of an essay of redefinition of mimesis. Nelson Godman tried it in his theory of languages of Art (1979 and 2006). The Angolan writer Pepetela (Drindarska & Malanda: 2000) shows it in his work Yaka (1988, and compare to Devish: 1972) as well as, Mayimona, the Angolan poet, in his Idade das palavras (2002); or Masongi in his symbiosis kimoyôngi (Batsîkama: 2009b) or other Angolan paintings (Mixinge: 2001) . The Muntu-Angolan mimesis is not frequently expressed as imitation or being, but as pseudo-imitation and existence: (a) pseudo-imitation because of unrealism and abstractionism (symbolism) of nature; (b) existence is promotes the real, the good, the healthy and seems to determine the status. The existence is vast, and being is included in it, that why the existence represents good/bad, healthy/unwell … (Batsîkama: 2009). Of course we’re in front of the no-Occidental aesthetics (Blocker: 2005) and there several examples outside of Africa, where African people were exported (Martinez-Ruiz: 2001)

This panoramic platform holds up the understanding of etonism.

IV. CONCLUSION

Is it possible to talk about the HOMO TOLERATVS (Locke: 2009, p. 43) in this XXIº Century? The reflexion on Etona’s artworks is really interesting as philosophical essay about the society seen by artist. This seems some introduction on the Homo Toleratvs as individual: intra-subjectivity. As well as each society needs good neighbouring for its tranquillity – as we consider the geopolitical theories of MacKinder/Kjeller – each person needs firstly to understand the neighbouring of his composition as existential entity. Etonism tries to show this composition and the inter-link of them.

The Homo Aestheticvs existed at all times, and he is old than as the Human existence is. The Homo toleratvs always existed where people got conscience of the existence as the unique way of continuation of Human being. In this case, Homo toleratvs is not “evangel” (Good news nor new)… but our Century needs it in renewed form in according to our challenge. Etonism as Homo toleratvs seems, in this case, a modest scheme.

V. BIBLIOGRAPHY

1) ABRANCHES, H. (1980), Reflexões sobre cultura nacional, Luanda, UEA/Estudos.

2) ARISTÓTELES (1976), Posterior analytics, Topica, Havard University Press, MA, (Tradução de S.F. Forster e H. Trederinick).

3) ARISTÓTELES (2003), Poética, Lisboa, Imprensa Nacional.

4) ASANTE, M. K. (1987), The Afrocentric Idea, Philadelphia, Temple University Press.

5) BASIBA, L. (1977), Contribution à l'étude des valeurs de l'art négro-africain: l'exemple de la plastique traditionnelle bakongo (Bas-Zaïre). Effort d'élucidation. Mémoire de licence en philosophie, Lubumbashi, Fac. des Lettres.

6) BASTIN, M-L., Statuettes Tchokwe du héros civilisateur Tchibinda Ilunga, Arts d’Afrique Noire, n.º 19.

7) BATSÎKAMA, P. (2006), Etonismo: estética de ruptura, Lisboa, Pangeia Editora.

8) BATSÎKAMA, P. (2007), Etonism: the philosophy of tolerant reason, Ankara: Sanart.

9) BATSÎKAMA, P. (2009), Etonismo: uma filosofia sobre a razão tolerante, Pensador/LS Produções, Rio de Janeiro/Luanda.

10) BENJAMIN, W. (2003), L’œuvre d’art à l’époque de sa reproductibilité technique, Paris, Editions Allia.

11) BIDIMA, J.-G. (1993), Théorie critique et modernité négro-africaine. De l'Ecole de Francfort à la Docta spes africana (Philosophie, 1), Paris, Publications de la Sorbonne.

12) BILOLO, M. (1986), Les cosmo-théologies philosophiques de l'Egypte antique. Problématique, Prémisses herméneutiques et Problèmes majeurs, Kinshasa-Libreville-Munich, Publ. Universitaires Africaines.

13) BIEBUYCK, D. (1973), Lega Culture: Art, Initiation, and Moral Philosophy among a Central African People, London, Univ. of California Press.

14) BLOCKER, H. G. (2005), «L’Estetica non-occidental come invenzione colonial», in “Discipline filosofiche” (Macerata), XV, pp. 211-222.

15) DEVISH, R. (1972), “Signification socio-culturelle des masques chez les Yaka” In Boletim do Instituto para Investigação Cientifica em Angola, Vol. 9, n.º 2, Luanda.

16) DEWEY, J. (2005), Art as experience, New York: Perigee Books.

17) DONOHUE, A. A. (2005), Greek sculpture and the problem of description, Cambridge - New York, Cambridge University Press.

18) DRNDARSKA, D. & MALANDA, A-S. (2000), Pepetela et l’écriture du mythe et de l’Histoire, Paris, L’Harmattan.

19) FERRY, L. (2003), Homo Aestheticus: A invenção do Gosto na Era Democrática, Lisboa: Almeida.

20) GAUDIBERT, P. (1991), Art africain contemporain, Turin, Diagonales.

21) GOODMAN, N. (2006) 1976, Linguagens da arte. Uma abordagem, uma teoria dos símbolos, Lisboa: Filosofiaberta/Grávida.

22) HEGEL, G. (1993), Estética, contendo as lições de Estética que Hegel proferiu entre 1920-1929, em Heidelberga e Berlim, Lisboa: In Folio Guimarães Editores.

23) HERMANN, N. (2005), Ética e estética: a relação quase esquecida, Porto Alegre: EDIPUCRS.

24) KANDJIMBO, L. (1997), Apologia de Kilatangi. Ensaio e crítica, Luanda, INALD.

25) KOFFI, K. (1997), Pour une critique du théâtre ivoirien contemporain, Paris, L’Harmattan.

26) KOTCHY, N. B. (2000), La correspondance des Arts dans la poésie de Senghor, Abidjan, Nouvelles Editions ivoiriennes.

27) LACOSTE J. (2006), Philosophie de l’Art, P.U.F.

28) LIMA, M. (1971), Fonctions sociologiques des figurines de culte Hamba dans la société et dans la culture Tchokwe, Luanda: I.I.C.A.

29) LOCKE J. (2009), Lettre sur la tolérance, Paris: P.U.F.

30) MAISON ROUGE, I. (2003), Arte Contemporânea, Lisboa: Editorial Inquérito.

31) MARTINEZ-RUIZ, B. (2001), Marks of the soul: poetics, philosophies and religions of contemporary Caribbean Art, University Galleries/Dorothy F. Schmidt College of Arts & Letters/Florida Atlantic University at Boca Raton.

32) MILLET, C. (1998), L’Art contemporain, Flammarion, Paris.

33) MIXINGE, A. (2001), Metáforas angolanas: um panorama das artes plásticas (1990-2001), Paris: Embaixada de Angola em França.

34) MIXINGE, A. (2009), Made in Angola, L’Harmattan, Paris.

35) MUDIMBE, V. Y. (1988), The invention of Africa: gnosis, philosophy and the order of knowledge, London: Edição de Autor.

36) MVENG, E. (1974), L’art d’Afrique noire, Yandoué: Editions Clé.

37) MVENG, E. & ENGLEBERT, (1980), L’art et l’artisanat africains, Editions Clé, Yaoundé.

38) NÉRET, G. (1994), Auguste Rodin sculptures and Drawings, Colónia, Benedikt Taschen.

39) NEVES E SOUSA, A., ...Da minha África e do Brasil que eu vi… Luanda: Machado Gravador, S/D.

40) PAULME, D. (1956), Les sculptures de l’Afrique noire, Paris: P.U.F.

41) PIEROBON, F. (2005), Quelques remarques sur la conception kantienne du jugement singulier, “Kant-Studien” (Berlin-NewYork), pp. 312-35.

42) PINSON, J.-C. (2005), L’art après le grand art, Nantes: C. Defaut.

43) VANDUNEM, F., Introducing traditional sculpture (the case of Yaka) into secondary Art Education in Angola: A curriculum experiment, University of Roehampton, Escola Superior de Educação de Viana do Castelo, January 2003.

44) VAZ, J. M., Filosofia tradicional dos Cabindas através dos seus cestos de panelas. Provérbios, advinhas, fábulas I, Agência Geral do Ultramar, Lisboa.

45) VERLY, R. (1955), “Les Mintadi (statuaire de pierre du Bas-Congo)”, in Zaire, n.º 9, Louvain.

46) WILLET, F. (2002), African Art, Thames & Hudson/World Art, London.