【24h】

The gesture of sight

机译:视线的姿态

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

The origin of images (defined as figurative drawings and including paintings and engravings) constitutes a question that remains unresolved. Ernst H. Gombrich (1971) and Whitney Davis (1986) have formulated hypotheses that prioritize different fundamental factors in their appearance in the European Upper Paleolithic. The current article identifies some problematic assumptions and oversights of these models, and proposes an alternative model for the origins of drawing in the Paleolithic. For Gombrich, images were originally suggested by shapes in natural features, such as cracks and evocative rocks, upon which people imposed semantic values. People would have discovered horses and bulls in vaguely suggestive rock surfaces and would have highlighted them with colors to render them visible to other onlookers. Whitney Davis reverses this process: objects (as evocative rocks) are no longer perceived as marks; rather, marks (traced by hand) are seen as objects. “Once marks are perceived as things, the full analogical power of the line is logically derived and even detached from mere experience of perceptual ambiguity.” Gombrich's hypothetis is paradoxal, as it requires the intellectual ability of “seeing as”- through the previous existence of “natural” images - to explain the emergence of such an ability as intentional drawing. But in David's view, the birth of images arises as a happenstance, even considered as a “logical” and necessary possibility inscribed in lines, that keeps drawing activities separated from any intentionality. If figurative tracings were only a technical development latent in the power of lines, they would have given form to all kinds of figures instead of being so strictly circumscribed to a limited range, namely animals and sexually-charged figures. In that sense, making images reveals an expectation, rooted in drawing activities, that emerges through the specific technical innovation of drawing: the outline. It encircles the dimension of time, internal to the line, in the spatial unity of a surface. It is an inherent and primary symbol of a living body. The visual threshold of resemblance arises from this significant shift. The outlined figures embody the limits of time (death and regeneration) through the sexual theme; and they embody spatial limits, through the animal/species theme. With these living ensembles of simultaneously shared and divided spaces, the question of identity (similar/dissimilar, unity/diversity) begins to be visually revealed.
机译:图像的起源(定义为具象的图纸,包括绘画和雕刻)构成了一个尚未解决的问题。恩斯特·H·冈伯里希(Ernst H. Gombrich)(1971)和惠特尼·戴维斯(Whitney Davis)(1986)提出了假设,这些假设优先考虑了在欧洲旧石器时代出现的不同基本因素。本文确定了这些模型的一些有问题的假设和疏漏,并提出了旧石器时代绘画起源的替代模型。对于Gombrich而言,图像最初是由具有自然特征的形状(例如裂缝和令人回味的岩石)暗示的,人们在这些形状上施加了语义值。人们会在隐约可见的岩石表面上发现马匹和公牛,并会用颜色突出显示它们,使其他围观者可以看到它们。惠特尼·戴维斯(Whitney Davis)扭转了这一过程:不再将物体(如回味的岩石)视为标记;相反,标记(用手追踪)被视为对象。 “一旦标记被视为事物,逻辑上就可以完全理解该系列的类比能力,甚至可以脱离纯粹的感知模糊性体验。” Gombrich的假设是自相矛盾的,因为它要求通过以前存在的“自然”图像来“看做”的智力能力来解释这种故意绘制的能力的出现。但是在大卫看来,图像的诞生是偶然发生的,甚至被认为是一种“逻辑的”和以线条形式刻画的必要可能性,使绘画活动与任何故意行为分开。如果比喻描写只是线条力量的技术发展潜能,它们将赋予各种图形以形式,而不是严格限制在有限范围内,即动物和带有性收费的图形。从这种意义上讲,制作图像揭示了一种源自绘画活动的期望,这种期望是通过绘画的特定技术创新而产生的:轮廓。它以曲面的空间单位环绕线内部的时间维度。它是生命体的固有和主要标志。视觉上的相似性阈值是由这种重大变化引起的。轮廓人物通过性主题体现了时间的限制(死亡和再生)。并且通过动物/物种主题体现了空间限制。通过这些同时共享和划分的空间的活生生的合奏,身份的问题(相似/不相似,统一/多样性)开始在视觉上显现出来。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Quaternary International》 |2018年第20期|2-10|共9页
  • 作者

    Renaud Ego;

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-18 04:09:01

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号