Antinomies of representation: Anthropology as an ekphrastic process
This article addresses a profound anthropological issue: how do representation and the represented relate? What motivates or warrants the inevitable disconnection? It is a mistake to dismiss representation as misguided, oppressive, or misleading. Representation is part of cognition generally and nat...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Journal article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
School of Social and Political Sciences
2014
|
Subjects: |
_version_ | 1826273556878589952 |
---|---|
author | Zeitlyn, D |
author_facet | Zeitlyn, D |
author_sort | Zeitlyn, D |
collection | OXFORD |
description | This article addresses a profound anthropological issue: how do representation and the represented relate? What motivates or warrants the inevitable disconnection? It is a mistake to dismiss representation as misguided, oppressive, or misleading. Representation is part of cognition generally and natural language in particular. As such it is inescapable and part of how we think and talk about the world. Moving between visual and linguistic anthropology I suggest that photographs and portraits provide a rich basis for thinking about the particular sorts of warrants for anthropological representations. The general conclusion is that anthropological representation may be conceived of as a form of ekphrasis (a verbal account or evocation of a typically non-present image or object) providing the indexical or deictic bridge between representation and the object represented. As “similarity implies difference” so “representation implies ekphrasis.” |
first_indexed | 2024-03-06T22:30:00Z |
format | Journal article |
id | oxford-uuid:57f73f3b-09ac-47c9-955f-4bc411e9e77e |
institution | University of Oxford |
language | English |
last_indexed | 2024-03-06T22:30:00Z |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | School of Social and Political Sciences |
record_format | dspace |
spelling | oxford-uuid:57f73f3b-09ac-47c9-955f-4bc411e9e77e2022-03-26T17:00:01ZAntinomies of representation: Anthropology as an ekphrastic processJournal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_dcae04bcuuid:57f73f3b-09ac-47c9-955f-4bc411e9e77eSocial anthropologyVisual anthropologyEnglishOxford University Research Archive - ValetSchool of Social and Political Sciences2014Zeitlyn, DThis article addresses a profound anthropological issue: how do representation and the represented relate? What motivates or warrants the inevitable disconnection? It is a mistake to dismiss representation as misguided, oppressive, or misleading. Representation is part of cognition generally and natural language in particular. As such it is inescapable and part of how we think and talk about the world. Moving between visual and linguistic anthropology I suggest that photographs and portraits provide a rich basis for thinking about the particular sorts of warrants for anthropological representations. The general conclusion is that anthropological representation may be conceived of as a form of ekphrasis (a verbal account or evocation of a typically non-present image or object) providing the indexical or deictic bridge between representation and the object represented. As “similarity implies difference” so “representation implies ekphrasis.” |
spellingShingle | Social anthropology Visual anthropology Zeitlyn, D Antinomies of representation: Anthropology as an ekphrastic process |
title | Antinomies of representation: Anthropology as an ekphrastic process |
title_full | Antinomies of representation: Anthropology as an ekphrastic process |
title_fullStr | Antinomies of representation: Anthropology as an ekphrastic process |
title_full_unstemmed | Antinomies of representation: Anthropology as an ekphrastic process |
title_short | Antinomies of representation: Anthropology as an ekphrastic process |
title_sort | antinomies of representation anthropology as an ekphrastic process |
topic | Social anthropology Visual anthropology |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zeitlynd antinomiesofrepresentationanthropologyasanekphrasticprocess |