Skip to main content

"In Eye and Mind," Merleau-Ponty is trying to evoke for us the experience of the painter. What is that experience and how is it supposed to change...

Merleau-Ponty focuses on embodiment, or how our bodies live and move and have being in the world. In "Eye and Mind," he looks at painters as embodied beings. Unlike scientists, who he understands as observing the world as if they are not a part of it, viewing it as an object "out there" to be studied, the painter necessarily immerses himself "in" the world. The painter's ways of seeing and moving become part of what he is painting. The painter sees, says Merleau-Ponty, with eyes that view the world, but these eyes also view himself, the painter, in the world. He paints with hands that are physically part of the world. His way of seeing is thus fundamentally different from the scientist's and more congruent with the reality of how humans actually interact with the world, for our bodies make us interconnected with the physical spaces we are observing. A painting is transformative because it reveals not just the detached object that the painter has rendered but a vision of the artist's consciousness in interaction with the world. This is more authentic than trying to observe as if we are standing outside of real space and time. As Merleau-Ponty writes,



I do not see [space] according to its exterior envelope; I live in it from the inside; I am immersed in it. After all, the world is all around me, not in front of me . . .



He also writes that, "It is by lending his body to the world that the painter changes the world into paintings."


This way of seeing is transformational, which I believe is what is meant by leading to a "new cultural regime," because it erases the boundaries between self and other and emphasizes that humans are part of, not separate from, the rest of the world. We are no longer looking "at" things but "with" a thing, or "according to it," as Merleau-Ponty puts it. There is no objective place we can stand outside of other things. This may seem more commonplace to us now in the post-modern world than it did in 1964, when the essay was written, but we can also safely posit that much of how humans view the world is still in terms of looking "at" it for purposes of control and domination rather than "with" it for purposes of understanding our interconnectedness.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

A man has a garden measuring 84 meters by 56 meters. He divides it into the minimum number of square plots. What is the length of the square plots?

We wish to divide this man's garden into the minimum number of square plots possible. A square has all four sides with the same length.Our garden is a rectangle, so the answer is clearly not 1 square plot. If we choose the wrong length for our squares, we may end up with missing holes or we may not be able to fit our squares inside the garden. So we have 84 meters in one direction and 56 meters in the other direction. When we start dividing the garden in square plots, we are "filling" those lengths in their respective directions. At each direction, there must be an integer number of squares (otherwise, we get holes or we leave the garden), so that all the square plots fill up the garden nicely. Thus, our job here is to find the greatest common divisor of 84 and 56. For this, we prime factor both of them: `56 = 2*2*2*7` `84 = 2*2*3*7` We can see that the prime factors and multiplicities in common are `2*2*7 = 28` . This is the desired length of the square plots. If you wi...
Post a Comment
Read more

What warning does Chuchundra issue to Rikki?

Chuchundra, the sniveling, fearful muskrat who creeps around walls because he is too terrified to go into the center of a room, meets Rikki in the middle of the night. He insults Rikki by begging him not to kill him. He then insults him by suggesting that Nag might mistake Chuchundra for Rikki. He says, "Those who kill snakes get killed by snakes."  He issues this warning to Rikki not to help keep Rikki safe but as a way of explaining why Rikki's presence gives him, Chuchundra, more reason to fear.  Chuchundra starts to tell Rikki what Chua the rat told him--but breaks it off when he realizes he might be overheard by Nag. He says, "Nag is everywhere, Rikki-Tikki." Rikki threatens to bite Chuchundra to get him to talk. Even then, Chuchundra won't overtly reveal any information. But he does say, "Can't you hear, Rikki-Tikki?" This is enough of a clue for the clever mongoose. He listens carefully and can just make out the "faintest scratch-s...
Post a Comment
Read more