Right for the wrong reason; wrong for the right reason: Gibson and Arnheim on picture perception

I. Verstegen
{"title":"Right for the wrong reason; wrong for the right reason: Gibson and Arnheim on picture perception","authors":"I. Verstegen","doi":"10.37693/pjos.2021.9.23480","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although J J Gibson’s theory of picture perception was often crude and biased toward naturalism, its fundamental division between the visual world and the visual field made it a semiotic theory. Contrariwise, although Arnheim wrote sensitively on pictures, he never seemed to admit that they were signs. This paper reviews both Gibson’s and Arnheim’s theories of picture perception, and explains where Arnheim’s biases caused him to lose the possibility of framing his approach in the most basic semiotic terms. Nevertheless, using the phenomenological semiotics of Sonesson and his theory of the Lifeworld Hierarchy, I demonstrate latent semiotic elements in Arnheim’s theory, due perhaps to Alfred Schutz’s influence. Hoping to argue against the brute theory of denotation, Arnheim instead sought to delay invocation of (conventional) signs as long as possible, and his idea of iconic pictorialization assumes but does not name signification. Nevertheless, I propose that Arnheim has a kind of theory of the Lifeworld Hierarchy inside the picture. Thus, he (wrongly) does not see the picture as overtly signifying but interestingly gives hints about how to treat the objects of the virtual world of the picture based on their relationship to the overall style of the work.","PeriodicalId":137065,"journal":{"name":"Public Journal of Semiotics","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Journal of Semiotics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37693/pjos.2021.9.23480","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

Although J J Gibson’s theory of picture perception was often crude and biased toward naturalism, its fundamental division between the visual world and the visual field made it a semiotic theory. Contrariwise, although Arnheim wrote sensitively on pictures, he never seemed to admit that they were signs. This paper reviews both Gibson’s and Arnheim’s theories of picture perception, and explains where Arnheim’s biases caused him to lose the possibility of framing his approach in the most basic semiotic terms. Nevertheless, using the phenomenological semiotics of Sonesson and his theory of the Lifeworld Hierarchy, I demonstrate latent semiotic elements in Arnheim’s theory, due perhaps to Alfred Schutz’s influence. Hoping to argue against the brute theory of denotation, Arnheim instead sought to delay invocation of (conventional) signs as long as possible, and his idea of iconic pictorialization assumes but does not name signification. Nevertheless, I propose that Arnheim has a kind of theory of the Lifeworld Hierarchy inside the picture. Thus, he (wrongly) does not see the picture as overtly signifying but interestingly gives hints about how to treat the objects of the virtual world of the picture based on their relationship to the overall style of the work.
正确的理由是错误的;错误的原因是正确的:吉布森和阿恩海姆关于图像感知的研究
虽然J·J·吉布森的图像感知理论往往是粗糙的,并倾向于自然主义,但它对视觉世界和视野的基本划分使其成为符号学理论。相反,尽管阿恩海姆在画上写得很敏感,但他似乎从不承认画是符号。本文回顾了吉布森和阿恩海姆的图像感知理论,并解释了阿恩海姆的偏见导致他失去了在最基本的符号学术语中构建他的方法的可能性。然而,利用索内松的现象学符号学和他的生活世界等级理论,我展示了阿恩海姆理论中潜在的符号学元素,这可能是由于阿尔弗雷德·舒茨的影响。为了反对外延的蛮力理论,阿恩海姆反而试图尽可能地推迟(传统)符号的调用,他的符号图示化的想法假设但没有命名意义。尽管如此,我认为阿恩海姆有一种关于生活世界等级的理论。因此,他(错误地)没有把这幅画看作是明显的象征,而是有趣地暗示了如何根据它们与作品整体风格的关系来对待这幅画的虚拟世界中的对象。
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
CiteScore
0.60
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信