This will prevent Ling from sending you messages, friend request or from viewing your profile. They will not be notified. Comments on discussion boards from them will be hidden by default.
Ling said:
"
we are here to attempt a semiological analysis that does not set out by acknowledging its dependence upon the linguistic (phonetic) model, but instead aims to define the specific semiotic function that constitutes the mainspring of pictoral productiowe are here to attempt a semiological analysis that does not set out by acknowledging its dependence upon the linguistic (phonetic) model, but instead aims to define the specific semiotic function that constitutes the mainspring of pictoral production. such an analysis cannot possibly proceed simply by a functional division of the painted surface into its constitutive parts, and then by breaking down those parts, in their turn, into the elements of which they are composed. on the contrary, it needs to circumvent the flat surface upon which the image is depicted in order to target the image's texture and its depth as a painting, striving to recover the levels, or rather the registers, where superposition (or intermeshing) and regulated interplay--if not entanglement--define the pictorial process in its signifying materiality. however, this should be done without presupposing their relative coherence or the possibility of drawing up a more or less exhaustive list of terms and functions that belong to the same class. in the absence of any explicit theory, the method to be followed must perforce be inductive. it would amount to inferring from an analysis of the pictorial process itself some concept of what we have called its various levels or reigsters, and then describing these, in the physical sense of the tern, and revealing their relative organizational role. (14)
hubert damisch, "sign and symbol" in a theory of /cloud/: toward a history of painting. stanford: stanford up, 2002....more
"