Michell Foucault, This is Not a Pipe (1968) Foucault, This is not a pipe |
|
Separation between linguistic
signs and plastic elements; equivalence of resemblance and affirmation.
These two principles constituted the tension in classical painting, because
the second reintroduced discourse (affirmation exists only where there
is speech) into an art from which the linguistic element was rigorously
excluded. Hence the fact that classical painting spoke—and spoke constantly—while
constituting itself entirely outside language; hence the fact that it
rested silently in a discursive space; hence the fact that it provided,
beneath itself, a kind of common ground where it could restore the bonds
of signs and the image. Magritte knits verbal signs and plastic elements
together, but without referring them to a prior isotopism. He skirts the
base of affirmative discourse on which resemblance calmly reposes, and
he brings pure similitudes and nonaffirmative verbal statements into play
within the instability of a disoriented volume and an unmapped space.
A process whose formulation is in some sense given by Ceci n’est pas
un pipe.
A day will come when, by means of similitude
relayed indefinitely along the length of a series, the image itself, along
with the name it bears, will lose its identity. Campbell, Campbell, Campbell.(1) * Translator’s note: the original
title of this chapter is “peindre n’est pas affirmer” literally, “To Paint
is Not to Affirm”.
(1) Foucault’s reference is not to Magritte but to Andy Warhol, whose various series of soup cans, celebrity portraits and so on Foucault apparently sees as undermining any sense of the unique, indivisible identity of their “models.” See Foucault’s comments on Warhol in the important essay “Theatricum Philosophicum” reprinted in Language, Counter Memory, Practice (Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 1977). From:
|