Poetic Signification and Communication

When we talk about poetry we generally know that about it it is recognized that art belongs to those who bring words or to those who, as Paul Valerie says, struggling with the verbal material, speculate on the sound and meaning. There are, of course countless definitions of poetry which in time have made a career. For example, in the ancient world, for Aristotle or Plato, this (references are made to the epic and tragic poetry, comedy, and dithyrambic poetry) is seen as an imitation, mimesis1, while for Kant, it is the art of a free play of imagination, the Fantasia as an activity of the intellect, and to Nicolai Hartmann the poetry must open a piece of the world for the reader. We understand, in fact, that poetry should communicate something, something that are either imitates parts of (privacy - mood)the author, of his world in which we integrate the cultural world and religious one), or something that can open ontological horizons (unexpected ones, those unlimited semiosis caused by the very expressions poetic metaphors governed by metaphor and ludic).Aristotle in his Poetics examines in particular the tragedy, not to achieve a theory about this, but rather, to show that, if it is well written, has an effect on the feelings and passions of the audience. Trying to define this art, the Stagirite aims at specific aspects of aesthetics because, as he notes, the author of a poetic piece adorns the speech with various kinds of ornaments (figures of speech, rhythm, rhyme, etc.).As a matter of fact, from among the arts, the Stagirite stresses that the tragedy (with its effects) awakens in the audience the joy of watching, that is the pleasure, but at the same time the contemplation, which according to the philosopher is the purpose of practical sciences (...) the pleasure that the imitations give is also felt by all. The facts prove it to be true. The things that in nature we can not watch without disgust - like appearance most disgusting beasts and death - imagined by high fidelity fill us with delight. The explanation, this time too, seems to me to consist in the special pleasure that knowledge gives not only to the wise, but also to ordinary people; only that these ones partake less of it. That is why those who watch a figmant enjoy it: because they have the opportunity to learn while watcing and to realize every single thing, for example that such way someone is depicted2. Plato in Ion (534b) speaks of an inspiration chain which starts from the Muse and, through poet, reaches the audience. But this transfer occurs after the poet is imbued with divine grace. The poet appears in Plato's conception as a'Tight, winged and sacred creature, able to create something only after the divine grace penetratesn him (entheos) and abandons his self (ekphron), deserted by reason/ judgementThe poet is the artist who uses words as symbols and places them around an idea. Placing these words, putting them on stage in relationships must show, on the one hand, the freedom of the poet from nature and, on the other hand, they must deliver in a message, the states and actions of the spirit. Novalis emphasizes in this regard, in the romantic manner of his time, that the poet holding the key of philosophy sets the words in relationship so as to tell about the universe household: His words are general signs - are sounds - magic words moving that set in motion around them beautiful groups. The same as the holy garments of the saints continue to contain miraculous powers, one word sanctified by a glamorous memory, becomes itself, a poem. For the poet, the language is never too poor, but it is always too general. He often has to use the same words, worn out by use3.But the poet must, despite the feeling of freedom, if he wants to convey messages about the state of the spirit of the world, to control the freedom of word association, because otherwise, falling into the verbal delirium dimension (amplified by not controling the fantasy or poetic ludic) he, instead of transmitting an information system (beautiful), valuable both in the text (aesthetic) and outside it, for a possible receiver will only achieve a reference ambiguity, of meaning. …