This issue of Itinera aims to address the connections between architecture and the performing arts in its various aspects and from multiple points of view. The growing emphasis on the performative character of artistic practices, namely, their ability to involve spectators directly and pervasively (Dixon 2007), imbues the relationship between architecture, the performing arts, and the spectator’s experience. The sharing of the scenic space by spectators and performers is essential for the co-production of a common energy which operates as a (...) “transforming force” and thereby opens up the shared experience of discovering oneself and the other as a union of the body and the mind (Fischer-Lichte 2004). (shrink)

Nature doesn’t seem reducible to rigid systems and classifications. Although resorting to metaphors may give rise to contradictions, it allows the elaboration of explanatory models which help us to organize thought and to find orientation in the natural world. Giving form through metaphors stands for seeking the way by which mankind looks for both solutions and new configurations to face nature’s enigmas. The creation of morphological and/or evolutionary metaphors framed in a schematic way what Hugo called “man’s groping in the (...) universe of nature”. Circles, arrows, spirals, scales, etc. stood for research directions: for example, scale became metaphor of an “animal universe” that – as it was thought to be in the Eighteenth Century – organized itself in a bottom-up scale. The circle referred to “metamorphosis” , which reminds us of Goethe’s thinking. Metaphors are never an aim in themselves: they always determine a way of thinking as well as choices and research directions. Such a use of the linguistic image deeply influences the very notion of metaphor as figures of speech . If, on the one hand, metaphor shows unknown structures of nature, on the other it rediscovers its own ‘naturalness’. Starting from the deep interconnection between functional and formal tasks in morphological discussion, metaphor turned from “figure” to “figuration”, Gestaltung , and in doing so it revealed a dynamic structure able to make us understand new links and directions in the sense of a metamorphic nature. Far from limiting itself to a historical retrospection, the methodological significance of having recourse to metaphor profoundly informs the most recent questions in the scientific field and notably in life sciences, in the very moment in which it leads and encourages a renewed dialogue between sciences and philosophy. (shrink)

La recente pubblicazione delle note di corso Recherches sur l’usage littéraire du langage sono una conferma del ruolo giocato dal linguaggio poetico in Merleau-Ponty in quell’ambizioso e incompiuto progetto perseguito dal 1951 Sur la phénoménologie du langage. La convinzione che il linguaggio sia la questione cruciale per la fenomenologia avvicina le ricerche di Merleau-Ponty a quelle che Ricoeur svilupperà negli anni Settanta: è nella parola, nel discorso pronunciato, che avviene non solo il rapporto tra soggetti, ma anche quello con le (...) cose. Per entrambi i filosofi la Lebenswelt è una sorta di terra promessa della fenomenologia; un mondo che ci è dato cogliere soltanto in modo mediato. E a rappresentare una forma di mediazione esemplare è la figura retorica della metafora, negazione di ogni tentazione di presa diretta, di trasparenza del linguaggio stesso: nella parola metaforica, non riducibile alla dimensione nominale, viene delineata una ontologia “indiretta” o “abbozzata”. Tecnica stilistica da Merleau-Ponty, a differenza di Ricoeur, più praticata che teorizzata, la metafora poetica, o viva, realizza lo snodo tra pre-categoriale e categoriale, tra mondo sensibile e mondo dell’espressione, tra logos muto e logos pronunciato. Riprendendo l’analogia individuata da Valéry tra danza e linguaggio letterario, Merleau-Ponty traccia una teoria della figura come espressione degli ordini di senso percepiti che può trasfigurare il linguaggio ordinario; teoria molto vicina a quella ricoeuriana di “figurazione” che nel mondo della vita si radica per poi tornarvi.La publication récente des notes du cours Recherches sur l’usage littéraire du langage confirment le rôle joué par le langage poétique chez Merleau-Ponty dans le projet ambitieux et inachevé qu’il engage à partir de 1951 dans l’essai Sur la phénoménologie du langage. La conviction que le langage est la question cruciale pour la phénoménologie rapproche les recherches de Merleau-Ponty de celles que Ricoeur développera dans les années 1970 : c’est dans les mots, dans le discours prononcé, qu’advient non seulement les relations entre sujets, mais aussi nos rapports avec les choses. Pour les deux philosophes, la Lebenswelt est une sorte de terre promise pour la phénoménologie ; un monde qu’on ne peut saisir que de manière indirecte. Et c’est la figure de la métaphore qui représente une forme de médiation exemplaire, comme négation de toute tentative de prise directe, de transparence du langage lui-même. Dans l’expression métaphorique, non réductible à la dimension nominale, une ontologie « indirecte » ou « ébauchée » est esquissée. Technique stylistique chez Merleau-Ponty, plus pratiquée que théorisée à la différence de Ricoeur, la métaphore poétique, ou vivante, réalise la jonction entre le précatégorial et le catégorial, entre le monde sensible et le monde de l’expression, entre logos muet et logos proféré. Reprenant l’analogie de Valéry entre danse et langage littéraire, Merleau-Ponty trace une théorie de la figure comme expression des ordres de la perception qui peut transfigurer le langage ordinaire ; une théorie très proche de celle de Ricoeur de la « figuration » qui, enracinée dans le monde de la vie, y retourne ensuite.The recent publication of the lecture notes Research on the Literary Use of Language confirms the role played by poetic language in Merleau-Ponty’s ambitious and unfinished project that began in his 1951 essay “On the Phenomenology of Language.” The conviction that language is the crucial question for phenomenology in Merleau-Ponty’s work nears the research Paul Ricoeur would develop in the 1970’s: it is in words, in expressed discourse, that we encounter not only relations among subjects, but also our relation to things. For the two philosophers, the Lebenswelt is a sort of promised land for phenomenology, a world that we can grasp only indirectly. And, it is the figure of the metaphor that represents an exemplary form of mediation, as a negation of every attempt toward a direct grasp, of the transparency of language in itself. In the metaphorical expression, which is not reducible to a nominal dimension, an “indirect” or “outlined” ontology is sketched out. In the stylistic technique of Merleau-Ponty, more practiced than theoretical unlike Ricoeur, the poetic or living metaphor constitutes a junction between the pre-categorical and the categorical, between the sensible world and the world of expression, between silent logos and pronounced logos. Referring to Valery’s analogy between dance and literary language, Merleau-Ponty traces a theory of the figure as expression in the orders of perception that can transfigure ordinary language, a theory very similar to that of Ricoeur’s “figuration” which, rooted in the world of life, subsequently returns to it. (shrink)

The theoretical model of landscape that is still widespread is that of a spectacle-image that offers itself to a contemplative, detached and disembodied gaze. Rethinking landscape means investigating the role of the “aesthetic”, i.e. of bodily experience, characterized by sensitivity and movement. This experience, which is fundamentally interactive, has a formative and performative nature: the aisthesis is closely linked to praxis, to the concrete ways in which we re-late to the environment and which become interactive strategies. These strategies can become (...) experiential habits that, if repeated in a mechanical way, can jeopardize the very interaction with the phenomenal world in which we are immersed. We tend to grasp only certain aspects of the phenomena that present themselves to us, over-looking not only the richness and plurality of the phenomenal world, but also its fundamental systemic and relational unity. The possibilities of formative and performative interaction can be grasped if the ordinary and daily level of experience is chal-lenged by sudden and unexpected encounters, which can initially provoke a sense of bewilderment and disorientation. What becomes “present” is the rhythmic unity of the phenomenal world, understood as an energetic momentum that holds together in a dynamic way the different elements of the world we inhabit. Through the con-cept of rhythm elaborated by Henri Maldiney we could advance a new aesthetic model of landscape understood as an actual cosmogenesis. (shrink)

The writings of Diderot, even the most philosophical, are characterized by a poetic style, by the frequent use of figures of speech, especially metaphor. The metaphorical images like, the "great chain of being", the "swarm of bees" and the "sensitive harpsichord", are an expression of experimental philosophy that proceeds by "presentiments", by intuitions and not by concepts. The philosopher, from the experience of natural phenomena, forms an idea, though vague, of nature as a dynamic unity of parts, as the order (...) in the making. Standing at the intersection of philosophy, poetics and life sciences, the metaphor suggests an image of the organic unity of nature and the human body, the continuous and gradual metamorphosis of every natural being. (shrink)