The body in brief

John M. Oksanish
{"title":"The body in brief","authors":"John M. Oksanish","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190696986.003.0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter continues to develop a picture of Vitruvian expertise by interrogating the implications of Vitruvius’s repeated characterization of his text as a complete body marked by brevitas. The corpus hominis bene figurati in book 3 (so-called Vitruvian man) is reconsidered for its relevance to the corpus of De architectura as a text. The body and its parts remain powerful metaphors for composition: a body is complete and well ordered, and provides a “lifelike” mimesis of what it represents. Despite ancient and some modern claims to the contrary, textual bodies never embrace the comprehensive wholes with which they are associated and, in the Roman period, are rarely politically disinterested. Textual bodies are often emphatically reductive and, as such, mediate various wholes and universals through synopsis and other forms of “definition.” Such a bodily metaphor is especially appropriate for Vitruvius’s “expert” text. Examples from Plato, Aristotle, Cicero’s letters, and the so-called universal historians show that the textual “body” (also often described as “brief”) involved specific, ideological value before Vitruvius. His claims to have ordered the synoptic body of architecture properly suggest an analogous ideological function. Physical bodies are “compositions” of nature, so the author’s claims to have put a textual body in good order mimic nature’s sense of what is appropriate. This is another quality particular to experts. Such expertise has implications well beyond the proprietary fields on which they lay claim. By cordoning off the true totality of architecture from the reader, the guiding corpus metaphor of De architectura is basically restrictive.","PeriodicalId":242293,"journal":{"name":"Vitruvian Man","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vitruvian Man","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190696986.003.0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter continues to develop a picture of Vitruvian expertise by interrogating the implications of Vitruvius’s repeated characterization of his text as a complete body marked by brevitas. The corpus hominis bene figurati in book 3 (so-called Vitruvian man) is reconsidered for its relevance to the corpus of De architectura as a text. The body and its parts remain powerful metaphors for composition: a body is complete and well ordered, and provides a “lifelike” mimesis of what it represents. Despite ancient and some modern claims to the contrary, textual bodies never embrace the comprehensive wholes with which they are associated and, in the Roman period, are rarely politically disinterested. Textual bodies are often emphatically reductive and, as such, mediate various wholes and universals through synopsis and other forms of “definition.” Such a bodily metaphor is especially appropriate for Vitruvius’s “expert” text. Examples from Plato, Aristotle, Cicero’s letters, and the so-called universal historians show that the textual “body” (also often described as “brief”) involved specific, ideological value before Vitruvius. His claims to have ordered the synoptic body of architecture properly suggest an analogous ideological function. Physical bodies are “compositions” of nature, so the author’s claims to have put a textual body in good order mimic nature’s sense of what is appropriate. This is another quality particular to experts. Such expertise has implications well beyond the proprietary fields on which they lay claim. By cordoning off the true totality of architecture from the reader, the guiding corpus metaphor of De architectura is basically restrictive.
简而言之,身体
本章继续发展维特鲁威的专业知识的图片,通过询问维特鲁威的反复表征,他的文本作为一个完整的身体,以简短的标记的含义。书3(所谓的维特鲁威人)中的语料库(corpus hominis bene figurati)因其与De architectura语料库作为文本的相关性而被重新考虑。身体和它的各个部分仍然是构成的有力隐喻:一个身体是完整而有序的,并提供了它所代表的“栩栩如生”的模仿。尽管古代和现代的一些说法相反,文本主体从来没有拥抱与之相关的全面整体,在罗马时期,很少在政治上不感兴趣。文本主体通常强调还原,因此,通过概要和其他形式的“定义”来调解各种整体和共相。这样的身体隐喻特别适合于维特鲁威的“专家”文本。柏拉图、亚里士多德、西塞罗的书信和所谓的宇宙历史学家的例子表明,在维特鲁威之前,文本的“主体”(也经常被描述为“简要”)包含了具体的、意识形态的价值。他对建筑的概要体的要求恰当地暗示了一种类似的意识形态功能。身体是自然的“组成部分”,所以作者声称已经把文本的身体整理得井井有条,模仿了自然对什么是合适的感觉。这是专家特有的另一种品质。这些专业知识的含义远远超出了他们所主张的专利领域。通过将建筑的真正整体与读者隔离开来,De architectura的引导语料库隐喻基本上是限制性的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信