From: Erik Hoogcarspel <jehms-AT-kabelfoon.nl> Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 20:30:55 +0200 Subject: Re: The code, JB, Best and Kellner Hi kellner-AT-ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Op woensdag, 28-apr-99 schreef kellner-AT-ccwf.cc.utexas.edu: k| Re Erik's commentary below: k| It seems to me to be uninformed and lazy to not discern the differences k| between the concept of code in various texts at specific stages of JB's k| work, as well as the differences, or similarities if they may be, with k| Eco. k| So my challenge (defi) to Erik: what are similarities in "code" between JB k| and Eco? Why don't you just ask? To me JB's idea of the code can be defined as the way the signs are organising themselves. The signifiers play their own game and generate meaning as effect, not seperately but together. The play makes it's own rules, because of these rules it can be called a code. Eco alows for different kinds of codes. There are 'sets of signals', sets of facts, sets of interpretations etc. But there are also total codes or s-codes as he calls them. These are sets of relations between sets. Now an s-code is an overall signifying system, just like JB's code. The difference is of course that Eco doesn't put so much emphasis on the domination of the signifiers as JB does. -- erik *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~* Erik Hoogcarspel < jehms-AT-kabelfoon.nl >< Boerhaaveln 99b > < tl+31.(0)104157097 >< 3112 LE Schiedam > < fx+31.(0)842113137 >< Holland > *===================================================================================*
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005