All that is solid melts into air
Armature : Memory/Personal Biographies
The Everyday complexity of things
Saturnian Form : Lead and Library Dates
Spatiality : Space over Time
Space folds : Containing "Spatialities around historicality and sociality"
All that is solid melts into air
Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels,
(Poetic observation concerning the constant revolutionizing of social conditions)
Perceptions now gathering at the end of the millennium. Spatiality, Robert T. Tally Jr. 2013
Douwe Draaisma, Metaphors of Memory (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).
“What metaphor, of all those that have been discussed, best describes the memory of psychology itself’
The author Draaisma Douwe poses this question at the end of an extensive study on the nature of what might be used to give form to ideas about metaphors of memory. The use in my practice of traces, inscriptions, photographic surfaces and materials used as indexical and material memories, call me to give some sense of critical analysis to the issue of metaphor and how it might be “formed” and “utilized” in the situation of work.
The attraction of metaphors is that they bridge or “hold court” within the visual and the textual, in the physical as perhaps a object association to a situation, and in the sensibility of the poetic.
Their inherent ability to be an intermediary between a number of things , gives them a lightness, a brevity and a concise comment on a situation, they auger well as a “what remains” of an experience.
An intriguing quality of metaphors is that they are a union/relation of oppositional associations, which are realized as “go-betweens” active presentations of a specific relation or thought “placed” by the association of concrete and abstract
relations/relativities. They function by their ability to reference their “betweeness” as held open by their associative registers." There is a reference to a set of concrete relations in one situation, in order to facilitate the recognition of an analogues set of relations in another situation.”1 Metaphors are structured and formulated around abstract relations around a concrete factualness of image associations.
G. F. Beck notes that “the metaphor is an intermediary between the agencies of the sensory and the perceptual and those of the verbal and the semantic thought; it belongs neither completely to one nor the other it mediates between analogous and semantic forms of thought
In a metaphor two constituents work to create its meaning, its place of register, the topic term and the vehicle term. This topic and vehicle terminology is used by Martin and Harre' when they write “ that the topic term and the vehicle term are each the centre of a semantic field and that the interaction between these two fields enables us to produce and understand new insights.”2 This research has been further investigated and subsequently the terms structured and functional have now been applied to inform the existing relations of topic and vehicle.
These further defining terms have arisen through metaphors becoming ideally suited to “explaining and teaching theories due to their combination of image and language, and of the graphic and the abstract.”3
This ability of “metaphor” could be directed at making it site-specific to a particular set of relations, an informative teaching device, that might engender interest through its perspectival analysis.
The metaphor is in effect a vehicle of projection in as much as it can project associations of one term over that of another , granting an intermediary state given by a superimposed form over its forming relations. This transparency and its associate projection creates new forms of thought. This value/trait has been intimated by research based around “ interaction theory” presented by contemporary theorists Martin and Harre' although the fundamental theory had already been presented by I. A. Richards in 1936. Richards stated “when we use metaphor we have two thoughts active together and supported by a single word, or phrase, whose meaning is a resultant of their interaction.”4
The “essence” of metaphor is that it has the ability ( or rather one appropriates this ability) to use something with a “concrete” image in which to form relations and new forms abstracted from this originating situation. This trait creates and is resolved by a “response", giving comment and a registering of relations. The response of metaphor to a situation could be used to underline a psychological feeling or comment about place.
Another interesting feature regarding metaphor is that metaphors can display a subjectivity, they can be said to become subject to “wear and tear.”
Like all human creations metaphors are subject to wear and tear and the process of interaction between the two domains which is set in motion by a metaphor may become fainter and finally disappear.5
This interaction between “domains” that can slide and eventually fail, and in so doing become obscured , announces the arrival of the phenomenon of the “dead metaphor.” The realisation of the “dead metaphor” is that of a metaphor gradually becoming a literal expression. The metaphor and its prose becomes as it were ossified out of usage, out of the living present. On the subject of dead metaphors Draaisma remarks “ that they have lost their graphic vitality as description of human actions.” Interestingly metaphors have already as it were “been done to death” through literal representation by conceptual artists. My interest is to appropriate their ability to encapsulate differences into a relation that mediates those differences, to aid a sort of summing-up that is “placed between” and is strangely pervasive and fluid , being just held between relations that could suddenly slide or shift. Giving and creating a metaphorical attitude to accompany the experience of place.
1 G. F. Beck, The Metaphor as a mediator between Semantic and Analogic modes of thought. ( Current Anthropology 19 1978)
2 J. Martin and R. Harre', Metaphor in Science in Metaphor, Problems and Perspectives. ( Sussex 1982)
3 Douwe Draaisma, Metaphors of Memory, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) page 15.
4 1. A. Richards, The Philosophy of Rhetoric. ( Oxford. OUP, 1936) page 93.
5 Douwe Draaisma, Metaphors of Memory, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000) page 13.
No comments:
Post a Comment