Rahpooye Honar-Ha-Ye Tajassomi

Rahpooye Honar-Ha-Ye Tajassomi

In Seeking the Common Ground of the Pictorial Representation Processes(A Semiotic Essay in Picture) ……. Research Paper

Document Type : Original Article

Author
Hamed Zamani
Ph.D Student in Visual Arts, Faculty of Visual Arts, University of Tehran
http://dx.doi.org/10.29252/rahpooyesoore.4.2.5
Abstract
The pictorial representation processes are of the most problematic, and at the same time, important issues that we face to in visual arts. Many thinkers have spoken about them and each of them has seen this issue from some point of view and presented some theories, and each of these theories has also set out some discourse and resulted in the other discourses that sometimes are very constitutional. Needless to say, such a breadth requires us to deal with the common ground of some numbers of the most fundamental of these insights. What is done in this essay is the consideration of some of the most important of these theories based upon the Charles Sanders Peirce’s semiotics, so as to find out whether we can find some common ground, while not so much limited, between these theories and whether we finally can identify some particular kind of audience. The result is that the theories under our discussion introduce some particular audience to us who is the reactive audience and can’t make any change in the picture before her. Then these theories, with all of the trivial and important differences they have, tell us about an audience’s subjective states who doesn’t want to roll up the sleeves and transform or transpose the representational relationships. She is the one who is accustomed to thinking and as though this thinking never is to be resulted in some physical action. The reactive audience who can’t or don’t want to change anything, in the eyes of each of these theories has a particular personality. In some of them, she is imaginative, and in some others is down-to-earth and rational someway. Some see her as somebody who is shifty and has an obscure mindset. We would set up a study based upon the Kith Kenney’s categorization concerning representation theories which itself is based upon the Peirce’s point of view about the signs, and we must say that the distal task is to lend weight to existence of some common ground between the sign-based theories. We would organize the theories which Kenney observes and add them some other perspectives, and in some cases go deep into the concepts and noise out some more details about them as much as possible so as to find out whether Kenny has overlooked some prospects -and that in our view is the case. We would make the case for some similarities between these theories and capture that our brother’s brain that seems to be intricate, is near enough simple really. The proximal task then is to focus upon the main mood of these theories which in turn speaks for the conceptions incepted and conceived through some normal person’s mind. Thus our discussion is mainly concerned with the notions regarding the indivisuals whose mental states are under our scrutiny. As you would see, each of these theories are fit into the Kenney’s categorization with an eye to the main elements of them in constitutive relation to the kinds of the sign, but these encapsualtions are not decisive anyway, and we point to this issue now and then somehow.
Keywords
Peirce’s Semiotics
Pictorial Representation
the status of the Audience
Pign-based Representation
منابع فارسی
استرنبرگ، رابرت(1393)، روانشناسیِ شناختی، ترجمه‌ی سید کمال خرازی و الهه حجازی، تهران: سمت.
امامی سیگارودی، عبدالحسین؛ دهقان نیری، ناهید؛ رهنورد، زهرا و نوری سعید، علی(1391)، روش‌شناسی تحقیق کیفی: پدیدارشناسی. پرستاری و مامایی جامع‌نگر،22(68)،56-63.
باستین، حامد و حجتی، محمدعلی(1395)، مفهوم بازنمایی در نظریه‌ی زیست معناییِ میلیکان. منطق پژوهشی، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی.7(2)،1-28.
مافی تبار، آمنه؛ کاتب، فاطمه و حسامی، منصور(1395)، تناظر بازنمایی تصویری و نظم در هنرهای تزئینی از منظر ارنست گامبریج(مورد مطالعاتی: طرح پارچه‌های محرمات). فصلنامه علمی پژوهشی کیمیای هنر،5(21).
مکآیور لوپس، دومینیک(1396)، چهار هنر عکاسی(جستاری  فلسفی)، ترجمه‌ی حامد زمانی گندمانی، تهران: پرگار.
نقیب زاده، احمد و فاضلی، حبیب‌الله(1385)، درآمدی بر پدیدارشناسی به‌مثابه روشی علمی. پژوهشنامه علوم سیاسی،1(2)،30-53.
منابع لاتین
Allen, Richard.“Representation, illusion, and the cinema.” Cinema Journal 32.2 (1993): 21-48.
Atencia-Linares, Paloma.“Fiction, nonfiction, and deceptive photographic representation.” The Journal of Aes thetics and Art Criticism 70.1 (2012): 19-30.‏
Benovsky, Jiri. “Three kinds of realism about photographs.” The Journal of Speculative Philosophy 25.4 (2011): 375-395.
Brubaker, David.“Andre Bazin on automatically made images.” The Journal of Aes thetics and Art (1993).‏
Budd, Malcolm.“Wittgens tein on seeing aspects.” Mind 96.381 (1987): 1-17.
Carney, James D.“Wittgens tein’s theory of picture representation.” The Journal of Aes thetics and Art Criticism 40.2 (1981): 179-185.‏‏
Casey, Edward S.“Imagination: Imagining and the image.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 31.4 (1971): 475-490.‏
Dilworth, John.“Varieties of visual representation.” Canadian journal of philosophy 32.2 (2002): 183-205.‏
Gabriel, F. Giralt.“Realism and realis tic representation in the digital age.” Journal of film and video 62.3 (2010): 3-16.
Harris, N. G. E. “Goodman’s account of representation.” The Journal of Aes thetics and Art Criticism 31.3 (1973): 323-327.‏
Hopkins, Robert.“What do we see in film?.” The Journal of Aes thetics and Art Criticism 66.2 (2008): 149-159.‏
‏Kenney, Keith.“Representation theory.” Handbook of Visual Communication. Routledge, 2004. 121-138.
Lopes, Dominic. Unders tanding pictures. Oxford University Press, 1996.
Lopes, Dominic M. McIVER.“Imagination, illusion and experience in film.” Philosophical S tudies 89.2 (1998): 343-353.‏
Martin, Edwin.“On seeing Walton’s great-grandfather.” Critical Inquiry 12.4 (1986): 796-800.‏
Nanay, Bence.“Perception and imagination: amodal perception as mental imagery.” Philosophical S tudies 150.2 (2010): 239-254.‏
Novitz, David.“Picturing.” The Journal of Aes thetics and Art Criticism 34.2 (1975): 145-155.‏
Savedoff, Barbara E.“Transforming images: Photographs of representations.” The Journal of Aes thetics and Art Criticism 50.2 (1992): 93-106.‏
Schellenberg, Susanna. “Belief and desire in imagination and immersion.” The Journal of Philosophy 110.9 (2013): 497-517.‏
Von Brevern, Jan.“Resemblance After Photography.” Representations 123.1 (2013): 1-22.‏‏
Walton, Kendall L.“Pictures and make-believe.” The Philosophical Review 82.3 (1973): 283-319.
Walton, Kendall.“Depiction,   perception, and imagination:Responses to Richard Wollheim.” The Journal of Aes thetics and Art Criticism 60.1 (2002): 27-35.‏

  • Receive Date 26 December 2019
  • Revise Date 05 January 2020
  • Accept Date 27 January 2020