Homo рictor in the anthropological dimension

Cover Page

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

A drawing is a graphic artifact; it is formed on a plane as a figure, from connected lines, dots, strokes and spots. The article examines the anthropological role of such artifacts in history. As a new species, man creates an artificial reality from objects, acting as Homo faber. On the basis of signs, he creates a language and acts as Homo symbolicum. Based on images, he forms systems of images that allow him to express emotions and feelings, acting as Homo pictor, or “the мan drawing”. The identified spheres intersect in reality, but for research purposes they can be differentiated. The article considers drawing as a media, as a mediator in the processes of perception and expressive activity. The ability of people to create things is associated with a counter movement, when things change a person, these processes give rise to a practical expansion of the sphere of contacts with the world, the process of expanding the mind. A phenomenological consideration of images involves studying the influence of human corporeality on the practices of producing graphic artifacts. Here, a person’s encounter with the world begins with the touch of a pencil to paper. A drawing made of lines and dots is not a copy of an object, it is a version of the thing made from special materials. The purpose of the article is to expand the panorama of the anthropological vision of man, to reveal the connections between the characteristics of Homo рictor and other features of Homo sapiens — the transformation of the objective world and the transformation of oneself. Images play an important role in the formation of visual media in culture, in the development of visual thinking, the processes of mastering the space and time of the life world, and the development of individual reflection. To study drawing is to study our speech about drawing, to study drawing as thinking.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

Viktor L. Krutkin

Udmurt State University

Author for correspondence.
Email: krutkin1@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-0433-4927

DSc in Philosophy, Professor of the Department of Philosophy and Humanities

Russian Federation, 1 Universitetskaya Str., Izhevsk 426034

References

  1. Бельтинг Х. Антропология образа / пер. с англ. С.С. Ванеянa // Искусствознание: журнал по истории и теории искусства. 2005. № 1.
  2. Belting H. Antropologiya obraza [Anthropology of Image], transl. from Engl. by S.S. Vaneyan. Iskusstvoznanie: zhurnal po istorii i teorii iskusstva. 2005. N 1.
  3. Бёрджер Д. Блокнот Бенто: Как зарождается импульс что-нибудь нарисовать? / пер. с англ. А. Асланян. М.: Ад Маргинем Пресс, 2012. С.113–116.
  4. Berger D. Bloknot Bento: Кak zarozhdaetsya impuls chto-nibud′ narisovat′? [Bento’s Sketchbook: How Does the Impulse to Draw Something Begin?], transl. from Engl. by A. Aslanian. Moscow: Ad Marginem Press Publ., 2012. P. 113–116.
  5. Гибсон Д. Экологический подход к зрительному восприятию / пер. с англ. А.Д. Логвиненко. М.: Наука, 1988.
  6. Gibson D. Ehkologicheskii podhod k zritel′nomu vospriyatiu [An Ecological Approach to Visual Реrception], transl. from Engl. by A.D. Logvinenko. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1988.
  7. Дамасио А. Так начинается Я. Мозг и возникновение сознания / пер. с англ. И. Ющенко. М.: Карьера Пресс, 2018.
  8. Damacio A. Tak nachinaetsya Ya. Mozg i vozniknovenie soznaniya [Self Comes to Mind. Constructing the Conscious Brain], transl. from Engl. by I. Yushchenko. Moscow: Kar'era Press Publ., 2018.
  9. Диди-Юберман Ж. То, что мы видим, то, что смотрит на нас / пер. с фр. А. Шестакова. СПб.: Наука, 2001.
  10. Didi-Uberman J. To, chto my vidim, to, chto smotrit na nas [What We See, what Looks at Us], transl. from French by A. Shestakov. St. Petersburg: Nauka Publ., 2001.
  11. Зенкин С.Н. Аффективный мимесис в искусстве // Миргород. 2020. № 1(15). С. 137–152.
  12. Zenkin S.N. Affektivnyi mimesis v iskusstve [Affective Mimesis in Art]. Mirgorod. 2020. N 1(15). P. 137–152.
  13. Маклюэн M. Понимание медиа: внешние расширения человека / пер. с англ. В. Николаева. М.; Жуковский: КАНОН-пресс-Ц; Кучково поле, 2003.
  14. McLuhan M. Ponimanie media: vneshnie rasshireniya cheloveka [Undestanding Media: The Extensions of Man], transl. from Engl. by V. Nikolaev. Moscow; Zhukovskii: KANON-press-TS; Kuchkovo pole Publ., 2003.
  15. Мерло-Понти М. Око и дух / пер. с фр. А.В. Густыря. М.: Искусство, 1992.
  16. Merleau-Ponty M. Oko i dukh [The Eye and the Mind], transl. from French by A.V. Gustyr’. Moscow: Iskusstvo Publ., 1992.
  17. Мерло-Понти М. Феноменология восприятия / пер. с фр. под ред. И.С. Вдовиной, С.Л. Фокина. СПб.: Ювента; Наука, 1999.
  18. Merleau-Ponty M. Fenomenologiya vospriyatiya [Phenomenology of Рerception], transl. from French ed. by I.S. Vdovina, S.L. Fokin. St. Petersburg: Yuventa; Nauka Publ., 1999.
  19. Плесснер Х. Ступени органического и человек / пер. с нем. А. Филиппова // Проблема человека в западной философии / сост. и послесл. П.С. Гуревича; общ. ред. Ю.Н. Попова. М.: Прогресс, 1988.
  20. Plessner H. Stupeni organicheskogo i chelovek [The Stages of Organic and Human], transl. from Germ. by A. Filippov. Problema cheloveka v zapadnoi filosofii [The Problem of Man in Western Philosophy], compil. and afterw. by P.S. Gurevich; ed. by Yu.N. Popov. Moscow: Progress Publ., 1988.
  21. Элкинс Дж. Исследуя визуальный мир / пер. с англ. А. Денищик и др. Вильнюс: Европейский гуманитарный университет, 2010.
  22. Elkins J. Issleduya visual′nyi mir [Exploring the Visual World], transl. from Engl. by A. Denishchik et al. Vilnius: European Humanities University Publ., 2010.
  23. Ямпольский М. Изображение: Курс лекций. М.: Новое литературное обозрение, 2019.
  24. Yampolsky M. Izobrachenie: Kurs lektsii [Image: A course of Lectures]. Moscow: Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie Publ., 2019.
  25. Ashton A. Drawing on the “Lived Experience”. An Investigation of Perception, Ideation and Praxis. Art and Design Review. 2014. Vol. 2, N 3. P. 46–61 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.4236/adr.2014.23007 (date of access: 19.04.2023).
  26. Bailey G.H. Drawing and the Drawing Activity: A Phenomenological Investigation. Doctoral Thesis. London: Institute of education, University of London, 1982 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos (date of access: 19.04.2023).
  27. Belting H. Image, Medium, Body: A New Approach to Iconology. Critical Inquiry. 2005. Vol. 31, N 2. P. 302–319.
  28. Beyst S. Mimesis and Semiosis. An Inquiry into the Relation Between Image and Sign. 2010 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://dsites.net›english/ mimesissemiosis.html (date of access: 19.04.2023).
  29. Boehm G. Representation, Presentation, Presence: Tracing the Homo Pictor. Iconic Power. Materiality and Meaning in Social Life, ed. by C.A. Jeffrey, D. Bartmanski, B. Giesen. New York.: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. P. 15–23.
  30. Crowther P. What Drawing and Painting Really Mean: A Phenomenology of the Image. New York: Routledge, 2017.
  31. Davidson I. Origins of Pictures: An Argument for Transformation of Signs. 2013. URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279174506 (date of access: 19.04.2023).
  32. Gell A. Technology and Magic. Anthropology Today. 1988. Vol. 4, Iss. 2. Р. 5–12.
  33. Ingold T. The Life of Lines. New York: Routledge, 2015.
  34. Ingold T. “Tools for the Hand, Language for the Face”: An Appreciation of Leroi Gourhan’s Gesture and Speech. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences. 1999. Vol. 30, N 4. P. 411–453.
  35. Jonas H. Homo Pictor and Differentia of Man. Social Research. 1962. Vol. 29, N 2. P. 201–220.
  36. Leroi-Gourhan A. Gesture and Speech, transl. from French by A. Bostock Berger; introd. by R. White. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1993.
  37. Malafouris L. Before and Beyond Representation: Towards an Enactive Conception of the Palaeolithic Image. Image and Imagination: A Global History of Figurative Representation, С. Renfrew, I. Morley (eds.). Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, 2007. Р. 287–300.
  38. Maynard P. Drawn Together. Graphics & Collective Intentionality. Theory and Criticism of Social Regulation. 2020. Vol. 1, N 20 [Electronic resource]. URL: http://mimesisjournals.com›ojs/index.php/tcrs/article/ (date of access: 09.02.2023).
  39. Miller D. Artefacts and the Meaning of Things. Companion Encyclopedia of Anthropology, ed. by T. Ingold. London; New York: Routledge, 1994. Р. 396–419.
  40. Mondzain M.J. What Does Seeing an Image Mean? Journal of Visual Culture. 2010. Vol. 9(3). P. 307–315.
  41. Rawson P. Drawing. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1987.
  42. Schirra R.J., Sachs-Hombach K. The Anthropological Function of Pictures. Origins of Pictures: Anthropological Discourses in Image Science. Koln: Herbert von Halem Verlag, 2013. P. 132–159.
  43. Sheets-Johnstone M. The Primacy of Movement: Maxine Sheets-Johnstone. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2011.
  44. Tilley C. A Phenomenology of Landscape: Places, Paths and Monuments. Oxford, UK; Providence, USA: Berg Publishers,1994.
  45. Walton K. Mimesis Аs Make-Believe: On the Foundations of the Representational Arts. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1990.

Copyright (c) 2024 Russian Academy of Sciences

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies