AESTHETICS No.13 (2009)

The Japanese Society for Aesthetics / 1

Bachelard’s theory of time:
Missing link between science and art
HASHIZUME KeikoTokyo University, Tokyo

Introduction
Gaston Bachelard (1884-1962) is famous as a philosopher who strove to understand thenature of art and science equally, and made original remarks in both fields. However, little
attention has been given to his theory of time. In this paper, I will aim to elucidate them in two
points.
Firstly, I will seek to describe what Bachelard’s theory of time is. Exploring his theory,
Bachelard criticized Bergson’s theory of time. Why did he dissent from Bergson? And in what
respects did their thoughts differ from each other? By considering these questions, we willfind the extent to which his theory of time relates closely to science.
Secondly, I will study the relationships between his theory of time and his theory of art. It
has been said that his theory of time led him to a new reflection on poetry, because this iswhere he started to refer to art. But why is art discussed in his theory of time? How did this
discussion influence his conception of poetry? Answering these questions will enable us towork out the common grounds and difference between his theory of time and his conceptionof art.
By considering these two points, we will see that his theory of time is not just in a whim ofa moment but is indispensable for understanding his theory as a whole.

1. Theory of time
The intuition of the instant (L’intuition de l’instant), which was written in 1932, is his firstbook about time. Four years later, he wrote his second book, The dialectic of duration (Ladialectique de la durée). In this chapter, we will begin our study of the theory of time byexamining these two books.
In The intuition of the instant, he picked up two thinkers who reflected on the question oftime and compared them to each other. One is Henri Bergson who noticed that duration is theessence of time in An essay on the immediate data of consciousness. The other is Gaston Roupnel
who was a colleague of Bachelard at the University of Dijon and who insisted that the instantis the true nature of time in Siloë.
Bachelard describes Bergson’s philosophy as a <philosophy of duration>, and that ofRoupnel as a <philosophy of instant>, and <of these two philosophies, the latter is the one
which corresponds with the more immediate date of consciousness>. He thus agreed with2

HASHIZUME Keiko

Roupnel.
Why the instant is an intrinsic quality of time? Bachelard maintained that the only time
when creation could happen is an instant, and explained it as follows.
In fact, if the instant was a false division, the past and the future would certainly be
difficult to distinguish because they are always artificially separated. We must thenconsider duration within an indestructible unity. From these considerations we can thus
see that all consequences of the bergsonian philosophy means in all our acts, in oursmallest gesture, we can seize the complete picture that begins to take shape.・・・
However, if we felt the sudden mutation where the creative acts are occurred, how is it
possible not to understand that the new era is always opened up by abruptness? Thus
every evolution, if it is important, is punctured by the creative instants [1].
Duration is time that continues, in which past and future could be divided <artificially>.
If the continuality is an essential quality of time, any moment has to relate to another moment.
In duration, even though something that seems to be new happens, such a thing always has
some connections with the past. That is, in Bachelard’s phrase, <in our smallest gesture, we
can seize the complete picture>. And can we think of such things as being really original?
Thus in duration true creation is impossible. The time when something new could happen is
the instant that is severed from the past, which is the era of <sudden mutation>. Such acreative instant can then be called the essence of time.
For Bergson, it would probably be difficult to agree with these remarks [2]. Duration in
Bergson’s theory is characterized by its conception of creativity, thus it is impossible to accept
Bachelard’s refutation. Concerning creativity, why did their views differ from each others? So
as to understand this, we need to examine Bachelard’s theory of science.
One of the main themes in Bachelard’s scientific philosophy is <epistemological break>.
This notion means that true creativity in the history of science is possible only when thehistory is discontinued and the past theory is negated at a particular time. The theory of timeparallels this theme. As if in the theory of science the interrupted history makes the newtheory, in the theory of time the interrupted continuity or interrupted duration makes thecreative instant, hence Bachelard rejecting the idea of creativity within the duration.
Moreover it must be noted that Bergson’s theory of time points to the defect of science.
Duration is described as <qualitative multiplicity> and having <no likeness to numbers>.
This means that duration cannot be conceived in terms of numbers, which is the foundationof science. Numbers can be divided at any point but duration is undividable continuity.
Thus science cannot give access to any understanding of duration, which is the essence of thetime [3].
We can now understand why Bachelard, who is a scientific philosopher, argues against
Bergson. It is interesting to notice here that Bachelard criticized his theory in respect of
creativity. He conceived that ordinary time seems to be continued. However it is not creative
time. Just like science gives a new angle of vision of the world by converting everything into
numbers, new things can come into being when the ordinary continued time is broken.
Thus, we can understand how the theory of time was closely related to the theory of

Bachelard’s theory of time3

science. And because of this, Bachelard could not agree with Bergson’s formulation ofduration. For him, the creation could be associated with the instant alone.

2. Art in the theory of time
In his theory of time, Bachelard, formerly known as a philosopher of science, discussed
for the first time about art. Why is art discussed in his theory of time? The answer is that two
philosophers picked up by Bachelard in his theory of time, i.e. Bergson and Roupnel, referred
to art. Hence we need to start by studying what they both said about art.
Roupnel was interested in the links that interconnect art and the notion of instant. He
wrote the following.
As everybody knows, art restores to the human thought the freshness of the original
sensations from which it is produced. Art rejuvenates the sense and the strength of meansof expression [4].
Siloë is a book that discusses time by considering the evolution of organisms and stressing
the role played by mutation. He insisted that renewing mutation is vital for human life andthat the art can give rise to one of them. Thus in Roupnel’s theory, art is indispensable for us
because of the relationship between mutation and instant.
On the other hand, Bergson took art as an example to show what duration is about in An
essay on the immediate data of consciousness. He explained duration by referring to art, especiallymusic. For example, he said the following.
Or I shall perceive (the ringing sound and the vanishing sound) one in the other, eachpermeating the other and organizing themselves like the note of a tune, so as to form
what we shall call a continuous or qualitative multiplicity with no resemblance to number.
I shall thus get the image of pure duration [5].
Bergson took a pendulum as an example to compare duration with melody. When we feel
sleepy while listening to the sound of a pendulum, we cannot figure out which single soundmakes us sleepy. When the last and the previous sounds <perceive one in the other> and<organize themselves like the note of a tune>, the series of sound becomes somniferous.
Melody follows the same principle according to Bergson. In music single sounds by themselves are not what captivate our attention. When several sounds make a unity, in other words
a melody, they appeal to us. Bergson argued that this is what duration is about. To sum up,
melody teaches us what duration is like.
As we have seen, Roupnel and Bergson referred to art when reflecting on time. But there
is a difference in content between Bergson and Roupnel. Bergson took art as an example ofduration whereas Roupnel related art to the instant. From which philosopher Bachelard took
his inspiration? The answer is from both.
We must now go to Bachelard’s arguments and we will see how having been influenced
by the two philosophers led to some ambiguity in his own philosophy.
Basically, Bachelard followed Bergson’s example, which we can trace in the following

HASHIZUME Keiko4

statement :We only have to closely examine any image of continuity in order to see hatches of
discontinuity. These hatches seem to be a continued shade, but that is a result of blurredheterogeneity. It is an argument that we have already presented many times. Here wewill see it freshly through a particular metaphor, that is, by analyzing the layer of music
and poem [6].
Bachelard argued that in <metaphors> a chain of instants appears to us as if it wereduration itself. These metaphors unite instants and create a false duration. In these metaphors,
there are music and poetry. They create <a layer> of instants, as an orchestra unites separated
sounds from various instruments in order to make a whole symphony, or as a poet brings
various images into one poem. This is how Bachelard brought art so close to the idea of
duration.
However there is a similarity between Bachelard and Roupnel too. We can see this in thefollowing paragraph :Is not the poetry then an accidental, detailed or distracting thing for being? Can it be thevery principle of the creative evolution? ・・・・It is here a series of questions that weare not qualified to go deep into [7].
We can see that in these sentences the relationship between the instant and the poem is
evoked, bearing in mind Bachelard’s theory of time according to which the true principle ofevolution is attributed to the instant. He writes that <we are not qualified to go deep into> thisand as such the issue at stake is not closely inquired into – which does not mean that thisrelationship should be neglected. This means that poetry that makes us feel duration is, on theother hand, connected to the instant. Thus, his theory of time seems to contain an ambiguity,especially when it comes to poems. This ambiguity stems from the works of the two
philosophers to which Bachelard referred and which had subsequently a great influence on his
theory of art.

3. Influence on poetics
3-1. Art at the beginning of poetics
Two years after from The dialectic of duration, for the first time Bachelard published a bookon poetry, The psychoanalysis of fire (La psychanalyse du feu). In this book poetry is discussed
from different standpoints, but there are some similarities between what he says about art andhis theory of time. What are these similarities? What are the differences? In this section weshall study his arguments about poetics by looking at The psychoanalysis of fire.
The psychoanalysis of fire is usually held as a book about art, but in fact its main theme isscience. Art in this book initially appears to be an obstacle to scientific thinking. As such, thearguments about art are different from the ones developed in his theory of time. We canhowever find a similarity. In order to bring this similarity to light, we will now focus on theBachelard’s theory of time5

notion of constancy of images. In the theory of time, art is one of metaphors that make theinstant look like duration. As one of these metaphors, Bachelard mentioned the power ofcustom, which makes us feel duration by repeating the same things many times [8], while in
The psychoanalysis of fire, the imagination makes images out of the same principle. They both
repeat similar things many times.
We shall easily be able to observe the observer and so arrive at the principles underlying
this value-laden or rather this hypnotized form of observation that is involved in gazing
into a fire. Finally, this slightly hypnotized condition, which is surprisingly constant in all
fire watchers, is lightly conductive to psychoanalytical investigation [9].
<The value-laden form of observation> means that the imagination enters into thescientific sphere as a thinking subject, and Bachelard sees this imagination as <constant>. In
other words, the reveries that the pensive man has when gazing into the fire have the same
unforeseen characters. The reason for this is that reveries relate to unconsciousness, inparticular the kind of collective unconscious that Jung had in mind. The constancy thatreveries have is similar to the customs that make us feel time as duration.
The link between the arguments in the theory of time and those developed in the poetics
can be confirmed by his reflection on art. As far as art has to do with constancy, and given thefact that the creation of new things is presumably for Bachelard of great importance, art ends
up with a negative evaluation. In fact, in the theory of time, art makes us confuse the true
character of time, and in The psychoanalysis of fire art makes an obstacle to scientific thinking.
As previously mentioned, the contents of the arguments are very different, but in both cases
art is evaluated negatively. The reason is that the element of constancy in art is confronted tothe creative element.
However the poetics does not wholly imitate the theory of time. The arguments change
gradually. Thus we must study these differences. In the theory of time, sometimes the art isevaluated positively, albeit on rare occasions. In the poetics a positive evaluation takes shape
more significantly. For example, Bachelard states the following :In any case, we must above all break the impulses of a reflex expression andpsychoanalyze the familiar images in order to arrive at the metaphors, particularly themetaphors of metaphors. ・・・・We subscribe to this view; rather than the will, rather
than the élan vital, Imagination is the true source of psychic production [10].
In the theory of the time, <metaphors> deceive us, but the expression <the metaphor of
metaphor> does not have a bad connotation. This means that art has close relationships withhuman nature. To arrive at this metaphor, we must avoid clichés such as <reflex expression>and <familiar images>, which are repeated images, i.e. constant images. When these images
are excluded, imagination can be <the true source of psychic production>. We should noticehere two points. One is that the creativity of art is discussed more expansively in the poetics.
In the theory of the time, the discussion about creation in art is only initiated. It remains onlyin the form of questions of which Bachelard says that they should not be inquired into moreclosely. Comparatively, in the paragraphs quoted above, creativity in art becomes more

6

HASHIZUME Keikoappreciated for its own value. If we can avoid ordinary images, it can be the source of
creativity. The second point that needs to be confirmed here is that the constancy of images
still has a negative connotation. Art becomes creative on the condition that the constancy ofimages is avoided. Thus creativity is the opposite to constancy and constant images keep
being disparaged [11].
3-2. Change in the way of thinking art
After The psychoanalysis of fire, Bachelard’s poetics became more established and his
evaluation of art changed. With these changes, the relationship between creativity andconstancy was being discussed differently. In this section, we will study these differences by
examining his article titled <poetical instants and metaphysical instants (instants poétiques etinstants métaphysiques)>, his poetics Water and dreams (L’eau et les rêves) and the notion of<material imagination>.
<Poetical instants and metaphysical instants> discusses, as its titles suggests, timethrough poetry. In this article, poetry is clearly related for the first time to instants.
Poetry is an instant metaphysic. In a short poem, it must give us a vision of the universe
and the secret of being and objects altogether. If it only follows the time of life, it is lessthan life [12].
Poetry is a matter of instant and it breaks the ordinary flow of time, in other words
duration. We can see here that poetry clearly relates to the notion of instant and is highly
appreciated as a thing that can teach us some secret. We may think this change occurs
abruptly, but it follows naturally the discussion about art in the theory of time that alreadyevoked some degree of ambiguity and in The psychoanalysis of the fire whereby the creativity ofpoetry becomes more important.
And this change leads to another change, regarding a relationship between the creativityof art and the constancy of images. To consider this, we need to focus on his conception of<material imagination> [13].
In his statements about poetry, imagination <liberates us from fundamental images anddistorts them [14]>. To pay attentions to the power of creating new images shows that thecreativity of art is of great significance. It is on the material imagination that he focuses. This is
the ability to create images through material factors such as the weight or the tactical sense.
Bachelard said that this imagination was indispensable for art and that philosophers
overlooked it [15].
It is important to notice that the material imagination produces constant images, just likethe imagination as discussed in The psychoanalysis of the fire. The images made by the material
imagination are apparently full of variety, but in secret have unchangeable characteristics.
This is easy to understand if we compare the material imagination with the formal imagination.
The formal imagination, which creates images through formal factors such as appearance,<gets its impetus from novelty> and takes <pleasure in the picturesque, the varied and theunexpected>. By contrast, the material imagination makes us notice <the constancy and lovely

Bachelard’s theory of time7

monotony of the matter>.
Both the imagination from his previous theory and the material imagination makeconstant images, but there are some differences between them. Bachelard said that when thematerial imagination makes images, even if they seem to be various, we can always classify
them into four categories, that is to say the four elements that are the earth, the wind, thewater and the fire. It is important to see here that, to group all image into four categories
means that this classification, to put it the other way around, does not restrict the freedom ofimages significantly. Otherwise, we could not find such a variety of images.
In The psychoanalysis of the fire the idea of constant images refers in particular to clichés like<familiar images> or <reflex expressions>. In comparison, the constant images made by thematerial imagination are not well-worn images, and as such we can reinterpret this constancy– formerly related to the negative evaluation of art. For example, Bachelard declares that :In order that a reverie is continued with such a constancy as to make a work written andthat it is not just the vacancy of fleeting time, it must find its own material and thematerial element must give its own substance, its own rule and its special poetic to areverie [16].
In the above passage, we can see that the constancy of reveries means the special rules ofthe material. It gives to images a reason to make them. The fact that images have constantfactors does not lead to mediocrity but to the vivacity of images [17]. Moreover Bachelard said
that everyone can understand new images because of constancy. Even though we meet images
that at first appear to us to be strange, we can understand them through the constancy which
they secretly have. Thus the constancy of images does not obstruct the creation of new images
but helps them. The material imagination can create new images because of their constancy.
Thus the constancy of images, which formerly meant mediocrity and barren duration, is
still a major dimension of art in Bachelard’s poetics although it is reinterpreted. Images follow
a special rule that makes possible to create new images through material imagination. Taking
the theory of time as a standpoint, Bachelard stressed the creativity of art in a way that was not
fully discussed before, which made him develop an original theory of art.

Conclusion
In this article, we considered Bachelard’s theory of time and highlighted how it relates tothe theories of science and art. In the theory of time he stressed that the essence of time is theinstant and that creation can happen in the instant alone. In the first chapter, we examined thisstance shares a common basis with the theory of science. In both theories, creation can become
possible when continuity is broken.
Moreover, the theory of time influenced the theory of art. Bachelard, influenced by
Bergson, mainly argued that poetry makes a chain of instants appear as if it were duration,
which is opposite to usual conceptions of creativity. But under the influence of Roupnel, healso suggested that poetry gives us the chance to experience what an instant is, and that it
consists in creativity. Thus, in his theory of time, especially when applied to the experience of8

HASHIZUME Keikopoetry, there seems to be an ambiguity. In 1939 he wrote his first books on poetics, The
psychoanalysis of fire, followed by Water and dreams (1943), in which he elaborated a newconception of <material imagination> that was based on the Elements. He thought that theimages of material imagination were constant and that this constancy was nothing but
duration. Further, he considered this constancy to be a positive property, holding that it gave
images creativity – something that was assigned only to instances in his previous writings.
Therefore, it becomes clear that Bachelard’s poetics is undoubtedly based on ambiguous
reflections about poetry in his theory of time.
Finally, as mentioned above, Bachelard’s theory of time bears a close relationship with histheories of science and art. This is the missing link that we have tried to disclose and which isindispensable to fully understand his theory.

Notes[1] Gaston Bachelard, L’intuition de l’instant, Paris, Stock, 1932, p.18. All quotations from Bachelardin this paper are translated from Frech by the present writer.
[2] In fact, Bergson said to Jacques Chevalier that Bachelard’s theory of time is a disappointment tohim (Jacques Chevalier, Entretiens avec Bergson, Librairie Plon, 1959, p.256).
[3] More precisely, Bachelard also criticized Bergson by referring to relativism. Bachelard said thatthe duration of time is relative to the speed of measuring points. Compare with this, the instant isimmutable and because of this it corresponds to the essence of time. With no doubt, Bergson
would not agree with this. For him science can deal with duration on condition that the essential
factors of duration are avoided (Henri Bergson, Œuvres, P.U.F., 1991, p.77). We can see again
from these arguments that science is key to the theory of time.
[4] Gaston Roupnel, Siloë, Paris, Stock, 1927, p.195. All quotation from Roupnel in this paper aretranslated from French by the present writer.
[5] Henri Bergson, Time and Free will, Trans. F.L.Pogson, Dover Publications, 2001, p.105[6] Gaston Bachelard, La dialectique de la durée, Paris, Boivin, 1936, Réédité in 1963, P.U.F., p.113[7] Ibid., p.11
[8] About the custom which makes instants the duration, Bachelard said that <duration, custom andprogress make an interesting trinity> (Gaston Bachelard, L’intuition de l’instant, Paris, Stock, 1932,
p.89).
[9] Gaston Bachelard, La psychanalyse du feu, Paris, P.U.F., 1937, pp.14-5[10] Ibid., pp.186-7[11] Though similar images are not always wall-worn images, Bachelard thought that similarity is anunavoidable factor for images and that to some degree it is compatible with creativity. <There is
no real flower that does not have this geometrical pattern. Similarly, there can be no poetic
flowering without a certain synthesis of poetic images. One should not, however, see in thisthesis a desire to limit optic liberty, to impose one logic or one reality (which is the same thing)on the poet’s creation> (Gaston Bachelard, La psychanalyse du feu, Paris, P.U.F., 1937, pp.185-6).
However his argument according to which the similarity of images is compatible with creativity
does not mean that the similarity of images helps creativity, like following arguments.
[12] Gaston Bachelard, «instant poêtique et instant métaphysique», in: L’intuition de l’instant, Paris,
Stock, 1932, p.103[13] Bachelard already mentioned the idea of material imagination in the psychoanalysis of fire, butthere are some differences compared with the arguments from Water and dreams. For example, inBachelard’s theory of time9

the former Bachelard referred to salt and alcohols as Elements.
[14] Gaston Bachelard, L’air et les songes. Essai sur l’imagination du mouvement, Paris, Corti, 1944, p.7[15] <When I began meditating on the concept of the beauty of matter, I was immediately struck by
the neglect of the material cause in aesthetic philosophy.> (ibid., p.2)
[16] Gaston Bachelard, L’eau et les rêves. Essai sur l’imagination de la matière, Paris, Corti, 1943, p.5[17] Thus the material imagination that makes constant images has more power to create new images
than formal imagination. Bachelard wrote the following: <Though forms and concept harden
rapidly, material imagination still remains an active power. It alone can revitalize traditional
images endlessly; it is the one that constantly breathes new life into certain old mythologicalforms.> (ibid., p.183)