La forma diagrammatica fra matematica e arti

Maria Giulia Dondero

Abstract


This paper aims to compare the theory of diagram presented in Peirce’s philosophy of mathematics and the reflections on the work of art formulated by Henry Van Lier and René Thom. The Peircean Theory of diagram states that a diagram is a configuration characterized as a totality (form) that is necessary and at the same time dynamic and experimental. In his lectures about the relation between the local and the global in art (Apologie du logos, 1990), Thom traces a theory of forms that can be compared to the conception of diagram in Peirce’s semiotics. For Thom, beauty is the result of strategies of framing and of composing parts in a dynamic totality. Van Lier’s develops the idea of a perfect totality characterized by a syntax of traits that are at the right place and that couldn’t be organized in any other way, without which the work of art would have no efficacy. For my part, I explore these conceptions of a necessary totality in the arts (aesthetic necessity) and in mathematical diagrams (the demonstration through perceptual forms) in order to describe the differences and the similarities between the theories and the domains of application

Keywords


diagram, perception, painting, sculpture, environnemental art, Charles Sanders Peirce

References


BASSO FOSSALI, Pierluigi e DONDERO, Maria Giulia (2011), Sémiotique de la photographie, Limoges, Pulim.

BAXANDALL, Michael (1985), Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of Pictures, Yale University Press; tr. it. Forme dell’intenzione. Sulla spiegazione storica delle opere d’arte, Torino, Einaudi, 2000.

BORDRON, J.-F. (1991) “L’objet en parties (esquisse d’ontologie matérielle)”, Langages 103, pp. 51-65.

BORDRON, J.-F. (2012) « L’image mathématique (suite) », in Visible n° 9, pp. 65-78.

BRUNET, François (2000), La naissance de l’idée de photographie, Paris, PUF.

CHAUVIRÉ, Christiane (2008), L’œil mathématique. Essai sur la philosophie mathématique de Peirce, Paris, éditions Kimé.

DONDERO, Maria Giulia (2009), «The Semiotics of Scientific Image: from production to manipulation», in The American Journal of Semiotics, vol. 25, ns° 3-4, pp. 1-19.

DONDERO, Maria Giulia (2010a) «L’indicialité de l’image scientifique : de la constitution de l’objet à sa manipulation», in Visible n° 6, pp. 91-108.

DONDERO, Maria Giulia (2010b), «Sémiotique de l’image scientifique», in Signata Annales des Sémiotiques/Annals of Semiotics, n°1, pp. 117-186.

DONDERO Maria Giulia e FONTANILLE Jacques (2012), Des images à problèmes. Le sens du visuel à l’épreuve de l’image scientifique, Limoges, Pulim.

FLOCH, Jean-Marie (1985), Petites mythologies de l’oeil et de l’esprit, Paris, HadèsBenjamins.

FONTANILLE, Jacques (1994), « Sans titre ... ou sans contenu ? », in Nouveaux Actes Sémiotiques, nn. 34-36, pp. 77-99 ; trad. it. «Senza titolo… o senza contenuto?», in Semiotiche della pittura (a cura di Lucia Corrain), Roma, Meltemi, 2004, http://www.ecaiss.it/biblioteca/pdf/15_corrain_semiotiche_pittura/corrain_semiotiche_pittura_cap8

.pdf.

GALISON, Peter (2002), «Images scatter into data. Data gather into images», in Iconoclash. Beyond the Image Wars in Science, Religion and Art (a cura di Latour e Weibel), Karlsruhe, MIT Press and ZKM, pp. 300-323.

GOODMAN, Nelson (1968), Languages of Art, London, Bobbs Merrill; tr. it. I linguaggi dell’arte. Un approccio ad una teoria dei simboli, Milano, Il Saggiatore, 1976.

GREIMAS Algirdas Julien (1984), «Sémiotique figurative, sémiotique plastique», in Actes sémiotiques, n°60.

GROUPE µ, (1992), Traité du signe visuel. Pour une rhétorique de l’image, Paris, Seuil; tr. It. parz. Trattato del segno visivo. Per una retorica dell’immagine (a cura di Tiziana Migliore), Milano, Bruno Mondadori, 2007.

HINTIKKA, Jaakko (1980), «C. S. Peirce’s ‘First Real Discovery’ and Its Contemporary Relevance», in Monist n° 63, pp. 304 – 315.

HOFFMANN, Michael (2010), «‘Theoric Transformations’ and a New Classification of Abductive Inferences», in Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society n°46, pp. 570–590.

LEYTON, Michael, (2007), The Structure of Paintings, Springer.

PEIRCE, Charles Sanders (1885), «On the Algebra of Logic: a contribution to a Philosophy of Notation», American Journal of Mathematics, vol. 7, 2, pp. 180-202; Collected Papers, 1931-35, 3.359-403.

PEIRCE, Charles Sanders (1906a), “Logic Notebook”, MS 339, p. 286r, September 5.

PEIRCE, Charles Sanders (1906b), «Prolegomena to an Apology for Pragmatism», Collected Papers, 1931-35, 4.530-572.

PEIRCE, Charles Sanders (1907), MS 318, pp. 52–53.

PEIRCE, Charles Sanders (1908) MS 201, p. 81.

PEIRCE, Charles Sanders (1931-35) Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, 8 vol., Hartshore, Weiss, Burks dirs., Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

PEIRCE, Charles Sanders (1976), The new Elements of Mathematics, 4 vol. (a cura di C. Eisele), The Hague, Mouton.

SAINT-MARTIN, Fernande (1987), Sémiologie du langage visuel, Presses de l’Université de Québec.

STJERNFELT, Frederik (2007), Diagrammatology. An Investigation on the Borderlines of Phenomenology, Ontology, and Semiotics, series Synthesis Library vol. 336, Springer Netherlands.

THOM, René (2006), Morfologia del semiotico (a cura di Paolo Fabbri), Rome, Meltemi.

THÜRLEMANN, Felix (1982), Paul Klee. Analyse sémiotique de trois peintures, Lausanne, L’Age de l’homme.

VAN LIER, Henri (2010), Anthropogénie, Paris-Bruxelles, Les Impressions Nouvelles; disponibile online : http://www.anthropogenie.com/main.html.


Full Text: DOWNLOAD PDF

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Rivista Italiana di Filosofia del Linguaggio - - - ISSN 2036-6728

 

Licenza Creative Commons
The works published in this journals are released under Creative Commons Licence - Attribution Non Commercial.