From: Kenneth Van Oost (email@example.com)
Date: Mon 27 Jun 2005 - 19:21:59 GMT
Representation of the thing is schematic, symbolic
Objectification is more detailted, more substantial.
Kate replied on the 6 th. of June,
" In what way more substantial ? "
<< Dali succeeded to ' load ' daily things like bread/ watches/
telephones with his imagination. In his hands ' everything ' became Dali.
He himself formulated this like " I ' ve always been in possession of
the ability/ gift to objectify my thoughts in a concrete material way,
and in such degree that the objects I point to, become magical. "
In a way, objectifying representations is like making the sub-
conscious conscious. What is unconscious is formless like egg- yolk,
and stays without the skills of the hands of the master uneatable.
Whithout thus the info where it gets its meaning from a representation
is nothing, even for us uncomprehensible.
Therefor things like dreams/ free association and automatic writing
were important to Dali, but also hallucinations, visions ( NDE) fit right
in the context we 're talking about here_ these things surpass the level
of normal daily discours.
We can 't place, only in a suggestive way, them in an understanable
representational system. There is nothing wherein we can fix their/ any
meaning_ if there is one_ to.
It is hard to understand that when we order lobster noone serves us
baked telephone !
Dali tries to give his irrational ideas an objective look_ that is what I got
in mind and that is what I try to bring to you_ that although we assign
meaning to objects/ words that the representation of those can 't exist
without a certain objectification of the stuff.
That a guy like Derrida claims that it is a Western misconception that
the truth always hides, must hide, itself behind something, that thus an
objectification isn 't necessary to get a representation, don 't really
borders me !
Derrida would say, the representation is the truth, but than you got a
huge problem_ the term in itself rules out a definitive answer.
Representation is always like a second hand store_ but that you need
a thing like an objectifiacation to buy the stuff, I don 't know ( you didn 't
hear it from me !), but that we need a kind of mental activity to get to it,
that's for sure!
Is that thingy, then what I call an objectification, well so be it !
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon 27 Jun 2005 - 19:36:34 GMT