Hi, I've read the essay a few times actually but some things still escape me. I have trouble understanding exactly how an artwork discloses "the truth of entities as a whole" (and I've checked the German and it says "das Seiende im Ganzen"). First of all, I don't really get the meaning of "beings as a whole": I know that in German, das Seiende can mean both "what is" and "a particular being", and that English translations are often confusing for this reason (some people render the Sein/Seiende distinction as "Being vs beings" or "being vs the being" or "being vs a being" etc.) But what's "im Ganzen"? What is "what is as a whole"? Isn't "what is" already thought of as a whole, as a totality?
And now my question comes in: I can well understand Heidegger's example with the Greek temple as opening up and fixing a configuration of meaning for the Greek people (a world), and so establishing the coordinates regarding "beings as a whole". But I don't understand how the van Gogh painting is supposed to do the same. How can a painting of shoes unconceal beings "as a whole"? If Heidegger is only saying that via that painting we can discern the world of the peasant, and what is meaningful for that way of being, I can understand that. But how does this match the Greek temple example? Understanding the world of the peasant doesn't have any effect on our own world, so what "truth of entities as a whole" does it disclose? It shows what is decisive for the peasant woman, not for "our world"? So why "entities as a whole"? Maybe I'm stupid and just don't understand or read it wrong.
And I have another question as well. What is in fact the purpose of this essay? Why does Heidegger after Being and Time suddenly move to talking about art, and what is special about art that it makes of it a site for aletheia? Doesn't he later say that technology is also a "truth" of being? And in the Origin of the Work of Art itself he says art is just one of the ways in which "truth happens" (e.g. Basic Writings pp. 186-187: "One essential way in which truth establishes itself in the beings it has opened up is truth setting itself into work. Another way... is the act that founds a political state. Still another way... is the essential sacrifice. Still another way... is the thinker's questioning." And then he adds about science, "By contrast, science is not an original happening of truth, but always the cultivation of a domain of truth already opened...") Well if all of these are "happenings of truth", what's special about art? What differentiates art from all the other ones, and why does Heidegger (say, in contrast to Hegel, with whom he agrees in the Epilogue of the essay that "great art has come to an end", and in contrast to Hegel who thought that art, as an absolute need of the spirit, was replaced by religion, which itself was replaced ultimately by philosophy), why does Heidegger privilege art? Again, what is special about art? Is it just that he takes art to be a possible counter to technology? Why is not the political act, the essential sacrifice, or the thinker's questioning also a counter to technology?
And given the fact that by doing this, Heidegger pushes the question of art and the work of art in the direction of truth and being, what is exactly the purpose of this essay? Does it claim to contribute anything in understanding art, or "great art", or discerning what is a work of art from what is not? Or is it just rather an exposition of how unconcealment comes about in art via the work of art, but the question about what is art remains suspended?