Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 10:49:58 +0100 (MET)
To: bhaskar-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
From: Bwanika <h961138-AT-stud.hoe.se>
Subject: Re: BHA: Maps and representations


At 09:02 30/09/97 +0300, you wrote:

>On the other hand, a viewer may well find one of their paintings evocative
>or expressive of some sort of emotion, sensation, or attitude.  Sometimes
>the painting's title helps ("Anger #5"), but then again it may not
>("Untitled #27").  I think one can argue fairly effectively that all
>images, whether or not they depict actual objects, involve representations
>in the semiotic sense; but in terms of arts criticism, "representational"
>usually refers to a specific technique or set of techniques which aim at
>some degree of verisimilitude, that is, life-like appearances.  From that
>perspective, "representational" and "expressive" are quite different.  The
>question might be clearer if we shift into a different artistic realm: when
>Mahler has an oboe (or whatever) play certain notes that sound like the
>cuckoo, we can call that moment "representational," in the terms of arts
>criticism; but it's hard to call the entire symphony representational in
>*that* sense.  It's a tricky issue (and in theater, even trickier!), and I
>don't want to get into the question of whether the concepts developed in
>arts criticism are good or not (in fact my own opinion is mixed)--I just
>want to indicate that the issue involves definitional and conceptual
>difficulties.
>

Tobin ,


Sorry for belabouring you on this issue.  I do understand that we might fall
into platonic dualism and idealism .  However I do believe that what is
representational  should be followed by expressiveness in order to reach
meaning - which sum is reality.
for instance pi is representational of a constant, which is expressively
meant to read into the area or circumference of a circle. Even if a circle
is a round and i can't touch it here now, on fish tin I can point on it .

But i can't say or use the term  * this * for example and you understand
what I mean. That is why I would like to understand the necessity of the map
- i.e. structure in sociology and maybe in economics . Hope, Hans Despain
can help explain the abstraction of markets were real things happen (social
life ) and  the difference which can be brought about by a shift from money
markets to social markets in a bhaskarian spirit.

I would like to add too that what is representational and expressive should
have meaning  i.e. - 0 degrees Celsius will mean nothing if I can't have
real  sense perception which should be meaningful on one side, i.e. to
freezing conditions, or freezed water . This is what i would like to call
the problematic reality .
 Once there is no problematic reality i.e. phenomena in a platonic idealism
conception becomes impossible- for instance, I see a Volvo you see Rover .
But then the problem comes with  * value * , for rationalism just suggests I
do as I perceive , but perception might be wrong which might lead me to a
terrible confusion of  the concept value, and if it has got something to do
with reality anyway. If there were no values how could world be ?
There will be no mass consumption ?


Bwanika



     --- from list bhaskar-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---