Idealist Epistemology and the Baudelairean Experience of Modernity

This study proposes an epistemological model on the basis of a streamlined and heavily modified German Idealism. With an analytical focus on the French Second Empire, the underlying research question is rather straightforward: how is knowledge created in material modernity? While the philosophical foundation is grounded in the work of Immanuel Kant and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, this study branches out and bridges the gap between philosophy and cultural studies by including the works of other canonical thinkers such as Walter Benjamin, Henri Bergson, Henri Lefebvre, and Georg Simmel. In this way, I aim to make German Idealist epistemology not merely more relevant in the context of material modernity, but also applicable as a methodology for cultural criticism. This is for good reason. There is a clear tendency in cultural studies to refer to Kant and Hegel without addressing or indeed referencing their primary works, and it is an important part of the rationale behind this study to provide an alternative.

Using my epistemological model as a methodology for cultural criticism, a second but in no way secondary research question emerges: how does the creation of knowledge in material modernity affect human existence? In this context, my argument revolves around the work of Charles Baudelaire, who, in his often-emphasised function as the first poet of modernity, serves as a cultural-critical gateway. Scrutinising Idealist epistemology from within the Baudelairean œuvre and vice versa will allow for a clear demonstration of how the creation of knowledge in material modernity filters into the aesthetic representation of modern human existence—as well as into the formation of modern society as yet another mode of representation, next to aesthetics. By enlisting the help of the canonical nineteenth-century sociologists Karl Mannheim, Max Weber, and Émile Durkheim, this study will eventually conclude twofold: firstly, that the specific socio-cultural and socio-economic conditions of material modernity eventually produce an epistemological darkness tainting all of modern human existence; and secondly, that this epistemological darkness ultimately leads to fatalism as a form of existential, socio-collective determinism in the guise of a materialist teleology.

The application of ‘theoretical’ philosophy within a more ‘practical’ analytical framework caused a number of structural, logical, conceptual, and terminological challenges. Resolving these provided not merely rich insights into the intellectual twists and turns inherent to any such undertaking, but indeed produced some unexpectedly positive and tangible results: the most prominent perhaps being that the Idealist epistemological focus on metaphysics also means that virtually everything within the human sphere must follow its underlying principles. As such, it bears enormous potential to conceptually connect various theories from various thinkers across the spectrum of the Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences. In cultural studies, one could argue, theoretical philosophy has a mediating effect and facilitates interdisciplinarity. Of course, there will always be a small fraction of sceptics who may not agree with the tenets of contemporary criticism—for example, Roland Barthes’ notion of the author being dead—and as such will sense anachronisms and biographical inconsistencies along the way. It is precisely for this reason that I have uncoupled as much as possible the epistemological concerns as addressed throughout this study from the poet whose œuvre serves so intriguingly to illustrate them. Whether Baudelaire had access to the writings of the German Idealists remains speculation. We do know, however, that Victor Cousin had introduced Kantian philosophy to the Parisian intelligentsia as early as 1818, and some of Baudelaire’s later terminology—‘l’objet et le sujet, le monde extérieure à l’artiste et l’artiste lui-même’—certainly suggests an engagement with those ideas constituting the very core of Idealism.

Finally, my approach to ‘Baudelairean modernity’ from a viewpoint situated decidedly outside of ‘Baudelaire studies’ led to the production of an overdue état présent regarding theories of modernity grounded in or inspired by the poet’s life and œuvre. Here, the explicit focus on ‘existing concepts’ as opposed to ‘existing literature’ allowed for a critical engagement with, as well as the conceptual linking of, some of the key problematics that have persisted in the field: beginning with Antoine Compagnon’s question of why scholarship continuously refers to a single Baudelairean modernity, while there are in fact numerous Baudelairean modernities: ‘Elles coexistent. Chacune s’affirme à partir de ses propres présupposés sans tenir compte des autres.’ Considering the prevailing dominance of Baudelaire in the French and indeed international canon, it seems surprising that Compagnon is the only critic to have ever made this issue explicit. I hope to have provided one possible workaround by conceiving the état présent in an essayistic format, embedding existing arguments into a single coherent train of thought from beginning to end. In fact, this entire study has been conceived in much the same way: as a theoretical treatise or perhaps thought experiment, applying the principles of Idealist epistemology to guide the reader through some of the pivotal moments that have defined modern Western thought since the beginning of the long nineteenth century.

This monograph is based on my doctoral research and concludes a thought process that started as early as 2008, when Prof Helen Abbott first introduced me to Baudelaire’s art criticism during my final year as an undergraduate student. It initiated a journey of discovery for which I will always be most thankful. I am grateful to Dr Damian Catani for discussing the manifold and often unexpected philosophical twists and turns so inherent to the project in its early stages. I am also thankful to Dr Maria Scott for providing extensive commentaries, especially on the Baudelaire dimension of my argument, as well as to Dr Gillian Jein for doing much the same with an emphasis on the intersection between theoretical philosophy and cultural studies. Grateful thanks also to Prof Carol Tully and Dr Francesco Manzini not merely for their intellectual input, but also for consistently guiding me towards completion. I am thankful to Dr Samuel Rogers who was most dedicated in his efforts to correct and adjust the many Germanisms pervading the argument. Much gratitude also to the editors at Peter Lang, whose diligence and attention to detail gave this manuscript a final touch. Lastly, the financial support of Bangor University in the form of a full PhD scholarship was much appreciated at the time; it paved the way for this monograph to come into existence.