Aesthetic experience and social praxis in the literary hermeneutic: H. G. Gadamer and H. R. Jauss

Faced with the aesthetics of negativity, both H. R. Jauss and H. G. Gadamer defend the institutional function of artistic language, and as such attempt to associate, again, aesthetics with social praxis. Jauss will renounce the autonomy of art---dislodged from a social and labour context---so as to re-associate again aesthetic experience with social praxis. However, for Gadamer, the autonomy of art---liberty vis-a-vis its representative finality---is not pitted against society and its valorative framework. The work of art according to Gadamer, is part of the social process wherein the human being fully realizes its humanity, giving it full recognition through its works. In a word, Jauss and Gadamer rehabilitate, as opposed to Adorno, the practical dimension of the aesthetic experience.;H. R. Jauss and H. G. Gadamer recover the notion of phronesis of the Aristotelian rhetorical tradition, to link art and social practice again. Both authors contribute a notion of weaker community than the one of the communitarism in use, that leaves space to the first moral person's reflexive and distanced construction.;We denominate "aesthetic of the paideia" the aesthetic hermeneutics of H. G. Gadamer and H. R. Jauss, to claim the communicative-practical value of the work of art in terms of cultural transmission. It is about a reaction to the aesthetics the negativity, such as that of T. W. Adorno. The hermeneutics of Jauss allows us to recover an outcast category in the current theory of art, the didactic of the aesthetic experience. Thus, our interest in Jauss among the authors of the aesthetics of the reception; his perspective, allows us to reconsider the notion of formation (Bildung) in the aesthetic gadameriana. We see this in "Wahrheit and Methode" in search of a deliberate continuity of Gadamer with the Aristotelian, humanist and rhetoric tradition, in which he continues as opposed to the cult to science.