The modern principle of freedom of subjectivity sets a moral standard which radically departs from Aristotle’s doctrine of the mean: modern moral agents, exemplified by the rising middle class, are granted the right to develop extreme dispositions towards goods like honour and wealth. Given that Aristotle considers such goods divisible in the sense that when one person gets more another gets less―the basic definition of distributive injustice―it isn’t surprising that modern philosophers like Kant have trouble reconciling this right with duty to others. Failing to resolve this dilemma satisfactorily in ethical terms, Kant and others turn to aesthetics, but Kant, at least, takes no account there of moral agents’ interest in the actual existence of goods. In this respect, the alternative to the Kantian aesthetic response I document in my dissertation is more Stoic than modern. This response, the modern mediocre-artist narrative, features a mediocre artist who fails to achieve the new standard of distributive justice and a genius who ostensibly succeeds. Though other critics discuss the ethical dimension of mediocre-artist narratives, they don’t consider the possibility that the mediocre artist’s failure might be due to the ethical dilemma just described. They therefore tend to uphold uncritically the narratives’ negative judgments of mediocrity, ascribing the latter’s failure to egotism. By contrast, I examine the genius’ artistic efforts for evidence of a similar failure. Ultimately, I demonstrate that the genius does indeed fail, albeit less spectacularly, arguing on this basis that egotistical characterizations of mediocrity are unjust. But the mediocre aren’t the only victims: in “concealing” genius’ failure, mediocre-artist narratives ignore unmet claims on its fruits. Finally, I invoke Derrida’s notion of the “lesser violence” to outline a new genre that recognizes the unattainability of the modern standard of justice. I call this genre morally progressive, rejecting Jürgen Habermas’ view that freedom of subjectivity has hit a dead end, and that we must backtrack to a philosophical turning indicated but not taken by Hegel, namely, the path of intersubjective freedom.

The modern principle of freedom of subjectivity sets a moral standard which radically departs from Aristotle’s doctrine of the mean: modern moral agents, exemplified by the rising middle class, are granted the right to develop extreme dispositions towards goods like honour and wealth. Given that Aristotle considers such goods divisible in the sense that when one person gets more another gets less―the basic definition of distributive injustice―it isn’t surprising that modern philosophers like Kant have trouble reconciling this right with duty to others. Failing to resolve this dilemma satisfactorily in ethical terms, Kant and others turn to aesthetics, but Kant, at least, takes no account there of moral agents’ interest in the actual existence of goods. In this respect, the alternative to the Kantian aesthetic response I document in my dissertation is more Stoic than modern. This response, the modern mediocre-artist narrative, features a mediocre artist who fails to achieve the new standard of distributive justice and a genius who ostensibly succeeds. Though other critics discuss the ethical dimension of mediocre-artist narratives, they don’t consider the possibility that the mediocre artist’s failure might be due to the ethical dilemma just described. They therefore tend to uphold uncritically the narratives’ negative judgments of mediocrity, ascribing the latter’s failure to egotism. By contrast, I examine the genius’ artistic efforts for evidence of a similar failure. Ultimately, I demonstrate that the genius does indeed fail, albeit less spectacularly, arguing on this basis that egotistical characterizations of mediocrity are unjust. But the mediocre aren’t the only victims: in “concealing” genius’ failure, mediocre-artist narratives ignore unmet claims on its fruits. Finally, I invoke Derrida’s notion of the “lesser violence” to outline a new genre that recognizes the unattainability of the modern standard of justice. I call this genre morally progressive, rejecting Jürgen Habermas’ view that freedom of subjectivity has hit a dead end, and that we must backtrack to a philosophical turning indicated but not taken by Hegel, namely, the path of intersubjective freedom.

The modern principle of freedom of subjectivity sets a moral standard which radically departs from Aristotle’s doctrine of the mean: modern moral agents, exemplified by the rising middle class, are granted the right to develop extreme dispositions towards goods like honour and wealth. Given that Aristotle considers such goods divisible in the sense that when one person gets more another gets less―the basic definition of distributive injustice―it isn’t surprising that modern philosophers like Kant have trouble reconciling this right with duty to others. Failing to resolve this dilemma satisfactorily in ethical terms, Kant and others turn to aesthetics, but Kant, at least, takes no account there of moral agents’ interest in the actual existence of goods. In this respect, the alternative to the Kantian aesthetic response I document in my dissertation is more Stoic than modern. This response, the modern mediocre-artist narrative, features a mediocre artist who fails to achieve the new standard of distributive justice and a genius who ostensibly succeeds. Though other critics discuss the ethical dimension of mediocre-artist narratives, they don’t consider the possibility that the mediocre artist’s failure might be due to the ethical dilemma just described. They therefore tend to uphold uncritically the narratives’ negative judgments of mediocrity, ascribing the latter’s failure to egotism. By contrast, I examine the genius’ artistic efforts for evidence of a similar failure. Ultimately, I demonstrate that the genius does indeed fail, albeit less spectacularly, arguing on this basis that egotistical characterizations of mediocrity are unjust. But the mediocre aren’t the only victims: in “concealing” genius’ failure, mediocre-artist narratives ignore unmet claims on its fruits. Finally, I invoke Derrida’s notion of the “lesser violence” to outline a new genre that recognizes the unattainability of the modern standard of justice. I call this genre morally progressive, rejecting Jürgen Habermas’ view that freedom of subjectivity has hit a dead end, and that we must backtrack to a philosophical turning indicated but not taken by Hegel, namely, the path of intersubjective freedom. / Arts, Faculty of / English, Department of / Graduate

L’objectif de la présente étude est de démontrer comment Zola, dans L’Assommoir considère l’alcool et comment le naturalisme est un outil pour faire la leçon sans esthétique, ou plutôt en ayant développé une esthétique nouvelle, dure et brute. Nous avons également essayé d’analyser en quoi l’esthétique de l’alcool épouse ou nuance le message moralisateur de l’auteur dans cette oeuvre. Nous avons mis en relief les relations de cause à effet entre l’alcoolisme et la médiocrité humaine. L’idée directrice est que si la médiocrité peut toucher tous les hommes, quelle que soit leur classe sociale, elle touche plus souvent et plus durement la classe ouvrière, les laissés pour compte, en les conduisant ou en s’ajoutant en plus à la détresse sociale, financière, et la faim. Nous avons ainsi constaté en quoi l’alcoolisme est le principal facteur déclencheur et accélérateur de cette médiocrité, qu’elle brise les rêves et enchaine à la misère. / The purpose of this study is to demonstrate how Zola in L’Assommoir considers alcohol and how naturalism is a tool to lecture without aesthetics, or rather develops a new aesthetic, hard and brutal. We have also tried to analyse how the aesthetics of alcohol marries or nuances the moralizing message of the author in this work. We have highlighted the cause and effect relationship between alcohol and human mediocrity. The guiding line is that if mediocrity can affect all men, it affects the working class more often and harder, leaving them in or adding to a state of social and financial distress, even hunger. We have seen that alcoholism is the main trigger and accelerator of this mediocrity, that it breaks dreams and binds to misery.

Through the triple changes which include the variation in society, time and space, the intelligentsia in Wei and Jin Dynasties came to a realization that life is capricious. They combined the thought of Tze-Shi (carefree and footloose) and Gui-wuo (emphasize the unique value of oneself) together with the tolerance of physical desire and worship of nature to develop two theories: Zhong-shen (consider body as the foundation of all) and Le Sheng (carpe diem/seize the day), which remain the keynote of the viewpoint towards body in Wei and Jin Dynasties. Wei and Jin Dynasties followed the theory of Chi-transformation in Han Dynasty, as well as the idea that form and spirit are one, and develop a complete viewpoint towards body which interprets body and mind as one unity. The Chi flows in the body and becomes the medium of body and mind, then goes outward to the relation between body and nature; human body itself forms a complete micro system, which, through the flow of emotion and Chi, echoes or responds with the macro system of nature. The intelligentsia in Wei and Jin Dynasties considered etiquette and music as the embodiment of nature and human body as the territory where culture and nature are embodied. Kuo-Shian interpreted the relation between body, etiquette and music with the theory of Shi-Jai-Ti-Chung (ease and comfort within the body). Etiquette and music was made in a situation in which ¡§ease and comfort¡¨ are in harmony with body and also communicate with the heaven, earth and man in a way that ¡§ease and comfort¡¨ harmonize with the nature, and brings heaven, earth and man in concordance. When etiquette fails to bring ¡§ease and comfort¡¨ to the body, the intelligentsia used body as a tool to fight against the rigid etiquette, in order to arouse introspection over Li-Yuan-Zen-Ching (etiquette should be made with human beings as the first consideration, and eschews rigidity or affectation), and at the meantime brings reformation and feedback to the society. The intelligentsia¡¦s rising consciousness of selfhood and body makes the relation between body and society an active instead of a passive one. The intelligentsia, while perceiving the change of society and understanding the fact that human nature is unalterable, were contented to remain the status as Chung-Zen (mediocrity, people who are between genius and fools), and pursuit the fulfillment of their dreams as well as the feeling of carefree. Those intelligentsia emphasized the value of themselves and preferred to be themselves while understanding completely the truth and limitation of life, and they responded changes of the society and time with the idea of Shi-Shin-An-Min (follow and accept your own nature, be contented).