All the better for being vague? The authority of text

Q2 Arts and Humanities
J. Stewart
{"title":"All the better for being vague? The authority of text","authors":"J. Stewart","doi":"10.1386/jwcp_00008_1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Middlemarch, George Eliot makes a claim for the superiority of writing over painting: ‘Language is a finer medium’, she has her character claim, because it is ‘[…] all the better for being vague’ (1871: 140). This is a perceived advantage that many artists would find it difficult to agree with as we find the use of text in both academia and in relationship to visual art to be anything but vague. On the contrary, language (and specifically writing) is the means by which hierarchies of power are established and reinforced and it is crucial in defining and conveying the meaning of images. For artists, this poses particular, well-rehearsed problems as we try to find a path between the ‘not-knowing’, the uncertainties of the visual and the authority of the written word. Rather than becoming trapped in the conventions of authoritative text, this article argues for a different way of writing in both academia and in the art world at large: one that reflects the processes of visual practice and thinking. Drawing on current experiments in collaborative writing, it argues for forms of texts that are more akin to speech: texts that forgo the authority of the word in favour of approaches that provide a space where uncertain and imperfectly formed ideas can be expressed and tested.","PeriodicalId":38498,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Writing in Creative Practice","volume":"13 1","pages":"259-270"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Writing in Creative Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1386/jwcp_00008_1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In Middlemarch, George Eliot makes a claim for the superiority of writing over painting: ‘Language is a finer medium’, she has her character claim, because it is ‘[…] all the better for being vague’ (1871: 140). This is a perceived advantage that many artists would find it difficult to agree with as we find the use of text in both academia and in relationship to visual art to be anything but vague. On the contrary, language (and specifically writing) is the means by which hierarchies of power are established and reinforced and it is crucial in defining and conveying the meaning of images. For artists, this poses particular, well-rehearsed problems as we try to find a path between the ‘not-knowing’, the uncertainties of the visual and the authority of the written word. Rather than becoming trapped in the conventions of authoritative text, this article argues for a different way of writing in both academia and in the art world at large: one that reflects the processes of visual practice and thinking. Drawing on current experiments in collaborative writing, it argues for forms of texts that are more akin to speech: texts that forgo the authority of the word in favour of approaches that provide a space where uncertain and imperfectly formed ideas can be expressed and tested.
含糊其辞还好吗?文本的权威
在《米德尔马契》中,乔治·艾略特声称写作优于绘画:“语言是一种更好的媒介”,她有自己的性格主张,因为它“……因为模糊而更好”(1871:140)。这是许多艺术家难以认同的优势,因为我们发现文本在学术界和与视觉艺术的关系中都是模糊的。相反,语言(特别是文字)是建立和加强权力等级的手段,它在定义和传达图像的意义方面至关重要。对于艺术家来说,当我们试图在“不知道”、视觉的不确定性和书面文字的权威之间找到一条路径时,这就提出了特别的、经过深思熟虑的问题。本文主张在学术界和艺术界采用一种不同的写作方式,而不是被困在权威文本的惯例中:一种反映视觉实践和思考过程的方式。根据目前合作写作的实验,它主张文本的形式更类似于演讲:文本放弃了单词的权威,而倾向于提供一个空间,让不确定和不完美的想法可以表达和测试。
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
Journal of Writing in Creative Practice
Journal of Writing in Creative Practice Arts and Humanities-Visual Arts and Performing Arts
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
×
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