[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[xmca] Ingold linking "figments" of imagination and "figments" of materiality as a single ontology

Hi Mike [and others who enjoy Ingold's writings]

I'm reading his article "Ways of Mind -walking Reading Writing Painting"
[see attached article if interested]

I love the way he writes and links up concepts and images into "fertile"
generative perspectives [as real]

Page 16 & 17 describe how he "developed" the ideas for this article through
"accidental" encounters that were linked into coherence. This descriptive
journey of "mind" is in itself worth the effort of reading the article.

However, I want to introduce the BIG question Ingold asks in this article.
He writes on page 16

"The question of the RELATION between the observation of marks and traces
inscribed or impressed in surfaces in the WORLD and the imagining that is
carried on, as it were, on the hither side of eyesight, 'in the mind'.
Reading and writing surely involve the exercise of both eye and mind, and
the same must be true of walking. Is it possible, then, to find a way of
describing the imaginative activity that goes on as one walks, reads or
writes, without having to SUPPOSE that it involves the perusal of images?
Perhaps it is the very notion of the image that has to be rethought away
from the idea that images represent, ON ANOTHER PLANE, the forms of things
IN THE WORLD, to the idea that they are PLACE-HOLDERS for these things
which travellers watch out for, and from which they TAKE THEIR DIRECTION.
Could it be that images do NOT stand FOR things, but rather help you FIND

This is a BIG question, worth asking.  The fundamental question, Are
aesthetically produced objects productions or compositions OF things in the
world, or are they LIKE things in the world in the sense that we have to
FIND OUR WAY through and among them as wayfarers dwelling in the world.
Ingold says he has NO FINAL ANSWERS to this big question, but as an
anthropologist the way he approaches the question is through an analysis of
the answers that people of radically different life experiences have come
up with. In other words Ingold accepts the EXCESS and "ambiguity" at the
center of his inquiries into the big question.

 Ingold, [like Zygmunt Bauman] engages with metaphors as a fundamental tool
for exploring the place of the imaginal within the world.  Not as two
separate realities or ontologies but as a single ontology. Ingold
definitely thinks outside the frames of received knowledge.

In a simple phrase the question becomes, Is it "true" that imagination IS

Hope you enjoy the article.


Attachment: NOVEMBER 9 2011 INGOLD TIM Ways of mind-walking reading, writing, painting - Visual Studies - Volume 25, Issue 1.mht
Description: Binary data

xmca mailing list