Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 17, No. 149.
Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/humanist/
Submit to: humanist@princeton.edu
Date: Sat, 12 Jul 2003 06:56:48 +0100
From: lachance@origin.chass.utoronto.ca (Francois Lachance)
Subject: geometric algebraic as critical vocabulary
Willard,
For a variety of reasons I found myself reading a piece by Dick Higgins,
"The Strategy of Visual Poety". Higgins establishes a distinction between
geometric and algebraic approaches to composition. I know about the
difference between arithmatic and geometric progressions. However I am
stumped in trying to locate any antecedants or parallels to Higgins
geometric-algebraic distinction. Any help from Humanist subscribers and
their contacts beyond list would be appreciated. [The impetus, for me, is
to trace out some precursors to the discourse on linearity in textual
criticism.] This is the passage from Higgins that entices and puzzles:
<quote>
[...] what syntax there is is geometric rather than, as in traditional
poetry, algebraic -- cumulative rather than linear. The elements taken
separately have no particular power or impact. But each line gets nearly
all its meaning from its relation to the others, where in traditional
poetry the lines normally make some sense even when isolated. In a
geometric painting, shapes get their relevance from their relation to
other shapes, and in a 'Proteus poem' the pattern of the components is far
more important than just what they happen to be.
</quote>
I am intrigue by the possible typology of patterns that the Higgins piece
suggests but unsure of its claims to the particular linkages between form
and semantics. Comments and pointers to similar formulations might help
elucidate the context which allowed Higgins to marshall the
geometric-algebraic distinction.
Thanks
-- Francois Lachance, Scholar-at-large http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/~lachance
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Jul 12 2003 - 02:13:16 EDT