LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for GERMAN-CFP-L Archives


GERMAN-CFP-L Archives

GERMAN-CFP-L Archives


GERMAN-CFP-L@PO.MISSOURI.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

GERMAN-CFP-L Home

GERMAN-CFP-L Home

GERMAN-CFP-L  December 2005

GERMAN-CFP-L December 2005

Subject:

CFP: Seeing Perception: Images & Texts (Germany) (1/31/06; 11/24/06-11/26/06)

From:

Megan McKinstry <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

German Studies CFP Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Tue, 6 Dec 2005 11:51:17 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (157 lines)

>
>From: "Dr. Silke Horstkotte" <[log in to unmask]>
>
>Subject: CFP: Seeing Perception: Images & Texts
>(Germany) (1/31/06; 11/24/06-11/26/06)
>
>Seeing Perception: Images & Texts (Universit”t Leipzig, Germany, 24-26
>November 2006)
>
>Over the past two decades, matters of seeing and visual perception have
>garnered increasing critical attention. With good reason, the visual
>has come to feature in several different disciplines as well as in
>inter- or transdisciplinary perspectives (such as ìvisual studiesî or
>ìvisual cultureî): vision can be, and has been, conceptualised as a
>philosophical category, as cultural medium of expression, as instrument
>and technology of visualization as well as a means of communication.
>
>Turning away from the ìdenigration of vision in twentieth-century French
>thoughtî (Jay 1993), studies such as Norman Brysonís (1983) monograph on
>the ìLogic of the Gaze,î Brennan and Jayís (1996) collection of essays
>on ìVision in Contextî and Jonathan Craryís (1999) book on attention
>have contributed to highlight the centrality of visual perception in all
>areas of Western culture. A majority of contributions to the field
>follow a Foucauldian trajectory in stressing the constructed and
>ideological nature of seeing. As Crary puts it, ìvision ... is embedded
>in a pattern of adaptability to new technological relations, social
>configurations, and economic imperativesî (13). On the other hand,
>however, James Elkins has described seeing as
>
>irrational, inconsistent, and undependable. It is immensely troubled,
>cousin to blindness and sexuality, and caught up in the threads of the
>unconscious. Our eyes are not ours to command; they roam where they
>will and then tell us they have only been where we have sent them. No
>matter how hard we look, we see very little of what we look at. ...
>Seeing is like hunting and like dreaming, and even like falling in love.
>It is entangled in the passions ñ jealousy, violence, possessiveness;
>and it is soaked in affect ñ in pleasure and displeasure, and in pain.
>(11)
>
>As Elkinsí title, ìThe Object Stares Back,î implies, there exists a
>reciprocal and indeed dialogical relation between spectator and object:
>ìUltimately, seeing alters the thing that is seen and transforms the
>seer.î (11f) Seeing is therefore closely related to matters of power,
>of sexuality (Rose), and to identity itself (Silverman).
>
>The conference Seeing Perception attempts an overview over the main
>historical lines of methodological research on vision and perception,
>and on the multiple ìpractices of lookingî (Sturken and Cartwright), as
>well as proposing new directions of research which are in continuation
>of, but nevertheless distinct from, those approaches offered by the
>visual studies/visual culture paradigm. Not the image as visible
>object, but the visual perception framing and surrounding it with its
>restless motion and performance constitutes the focal point of this
>conference. Visual perception as we conceive of it need not be limited
>to the realm of optics and to optical media; it also determines
>processes of reading and constructions of time and space, as well as
>bodily experience and processes of cognition. The multiple and varied
>treatments these topics have received make it necessary to take stock of
>the current state of debates surrounding seeing and perception, and to
>inquire into their underlying bases. Thus, we are interested in papers
>focussing on questions of theory and method (rather than mere case
>studies). Participants are invited from the following disciplines and
>fields of study: visual studies; art history; film studies; media and
>communication; theory of photography; literature; semiotics;
>narratology; philosophy.
>
>
>We currently envision four conference sections:
>
>The relation of spectator and object
>Conceptualizing the relation of spectator and object raises questions of
>identity and alterity, self and other, as well as inquiring into the
>specific nature of seeing and looking. Formulations such as the ìgaze,î
>Lacanian (Silverman) or not (Bryson 1983, 1988), fixate that relation by
>describing looking as a voyeuristic desire that forcefully moves towards
>the image and only partially replaces a desired touch with looking.
>Brysonís ìglance,î on the other hand, describes a respectful and
>self-reflexive way of looking and thus keeps the relation of spectator
>and object in an unfixable motion.
>Going one step further, theorists such as George Didi-Huberman, James
>Elkins and W.J.T. Mitchell have furnished the image with its own set of
>eyes when they imply that images can be organisms with their own
>peculiar life and an at times threatening activity. Gottfried Boehmís
>(2004) recent postulate of a new definition of the image no longer
>orients itself towards a frame, limiting part or detail, but rather
>centres on the intentional focus which the spectator directs at an
>imaging field. Conversely, images, with their ordered visuality, can
>seem to be ëaliveí or even ëlook backí at the spectator. We invite
>papers that critique the dynamic and dialogical formulation of the
>relation between spectator and object, or papers focusing on the
>questionable agency of the object.
>
>Pragmatics of the image
>It is well known that images can not only be looked at or perceived, but
>also touched, used, painted over or destroyed (Freedberg). This line of
>research has received increased attention through the study of new media
>and media art, of computer games and every kind of interactive image
>use. Such a pragmatics of the image is concerned with images as
>objects, as well as images as action, event or experience, as creation,
>configuration or as a deconstruction of identity (and of alterity). At
>the same time, this approach stresses that logical differentiations
>between image and medium rely on a concept of perception which includes
>imagination, memory, and other practices of image production in which
>all meaning-making processes relating to images are based. In this
>context, we would like to query how far images can be said to steer or
>control perception, and how images translate perception into physical
>reactions, social gestures and pragmatic actions.
>
>Perspectives on focalization
>The concept of focalization, drawn from narratological theory (Genette),
>is one of the key issues in theories geared towards a transmedial
>narratology in the sense of a set of universal, media-independent tools
>of interpretation. Through its basis in the notion of perspective,
>focalization is associated with matters of vision; it has therefore been
>proposed as a concept bridging textuality and visuality (Bal), and has
>been tentatively used as a tool for analyzing visual artifacts (Yacobi
>2002) as well as ones that combine the visual and the verbal
>(Horstkotte). However, it remains to be seen in how far focalization
>can serve to grasp the inherent problematic of seeing and the visual, or
>if it remains a metaphor for more traditional (or simple technical)
>concepts such as perspective. In particular, concepts of a ëvisualí
>focalization will have to explain how different narrative agents
>(author, narrator, focalizor) can be separated if we move from the
>textual to the iconic paradigm. The distinction between focalizor and
>narrator is crucial in narrative; in visual art, however, it is not
>always possible to clearly discriminate between a narrative agent and
>the represented perspective. How, then, can we move beyond the
>constrictions inherent in an overtly technical concept of perspective,
>and how can narratological categories such as focalization help us in
>analyzing modes of perception both within the image and circulating
>around it?
>
>
>Describing seeing, describing images
>The ways in which images are perceived in Western culture are
>inextricably linked with verbal and textual structures and ways of
>thinking. If words can ìcite,î but never ìsight,î as W.J.T. Mitchell
>(1994) has it, how can the verbal paradigm deal adequately with matters
>of vision and perception? We invite participants to inquire into what
>Tamar Yacobi (2000) has termed ìinterart narrative;î moreover, we are
>interested in approaches linking images and texts, as each otherís
>ìother,î beyond classical traditions of ekphrasis.
>
>
>
>Please email paper proposals (300 words), accompanied by a short bio, by
>31 January 2006.
>Dr. Silke Horstkotte, Universitaet Leipzig ([log in to unmask])
>Dr. Karin Leonhard, Universitaet Eichstaett-Ingolstadt
>([log in to unmask])

*******************
The German Studies Call for Papers List
Editor: Stefani Engelstein
Assistant Editor: Megan McKinstry
Sponsored by the University of Missouri
Info available at: http://www.missouri.edu/~graswww/resources/gerlistserv.html

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



PO.MISSOURI.EDU

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager