Inflected Pictorial Experience: Its Treatment and Significance

In Catharine Abell & Katerina Bantinaki (eds.), Philosophical Perspectives on Picturing. Oxford University Press (2010)
Abstract
Some (Podro, Lopes) think that sometimes our experience of pictures is ‘inflected’. What we see in these pictures involves, somehow, an awareness of features of their design. I clarify the idea of inflection, arguing that the thought must be that what is seen in the picture is something with properties which themselves need characterising by reference to that picture’s design, conceived as such. I argue that there is at least one case of inflection, so understood. Proponents of inflection have claimed great significance for the phenomenon. But what might that significance be? Inter alia, I consider Lopes’s proposal that inflection solves a central problem in pictorial aesthetics, the ‘puzzle of mimesis’. I argue that the puzzle, and the proposed solution, both turn on aspects of Lopes’s conception of seeing-in. Other accounts of seeing-in can make no sense of either. I further argue that the phenomenon of inflection itself puts pressure on the sort of account Lopes offers. Thus it is hard to offer a view which both holds that inflection occurs and is able to make clear sense of why it matters.
Keywords Painting  Pictorial aesthetics  Seeing-in  D.M.Lopes  M.Podro  Inflection
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Trompe L’Oeil and the Dorsal/Ventral Account of Picture Perception.Bence Nanay - 2015 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 6 (1):181-197.
Pictorial Experience: Not so Special After All.Alon Chasid - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 171 (3):471-491.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Reasons for Looking: Lopes on the Value of Pictures.Robert Hopkins - 2008 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 77 (2):556-569.
Touching Pictures.Robert Hopkins - 2000 - British Journal of Aesthetics 40 (1):149-167.
Inflected and Uninflected Perception of Pictures.Bence Nanay - 2010 - In C. Abell & K. Bantilaki (eds.), Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction. Oxford University Press.
Understanding Pictures.Dominic Lopes - 1996 - Oxford University Press.
How Demonstrative Pictorial Reference Grounds Contextualism.Alberto Voltolini - 2009 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 90 (3):402-418.
Pictorial Realism.Dominic Lopes - 1995 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 53 (3):277-285.
Some Problems with the Lexical Status of Nondefault Inflection.Peter Indefrey - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (6):1025-1025.
Pictorial Realism.Catharine Abell - 2007 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 85 (1):1 – 17.
Why the Pictorial Relation is Not Reference.Alon Chasid - 2004 - British Journal of Aesthetics 44 (3):226-247.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2011-08-01

Total downloads

68 ( #78,232 of 2,178,143 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

44 ( #5,325 of 2,178,143 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums