The Art and Philosophy

It is never enough to insist on the arbitrary character of the old opposition between art and philosophy. If we want to interpret it in a very precise sense, it is certainly false. If we would simply mean that these two disciplines have, each, its particular climate, this is true of course, but very vague. The only acceptable argument lay in the contradiction between the raised closed philosopher in the middle of your system and the artist placed before the work. But this was valid for a certain form of art and philosophy, which we have considered secondary. The idea of ​​a separate art from its creator is not only outmoded. It is false. In contrast to the artist, we are told that no philosopher ever made several systems.
But this is true, the very extent that no artist ever expressed more than one thing under different faces. The instantaneous perfection of art, the need for renewal, is only true for prejudice. Because the work of art is also a building, and everyone knows how great creators can be monotonous. The artist, as the thinker, is committed to and is made in his work. This osmosis raises the most important aesthetic problems. In addition, nothing is more vain that these distinctions, using the methods and objects, who is persuaded of the unity of purpose of the spirit. There are no boundaries between disciplines that man proposes, to understand and love. Interpenetrate and confuses them the same anguish.

Albert Camus, in "O Mito de Sísifo"