Abstract
What do we see what we look at pictures? What kind of vision is conveyed by and through pictorial representation? Such questions have been kept aesthetics and visual studies busy for decades. As it turns out, the philosophy of Ludwig Wittgenstein has proven to be a major source of inspiration in these discussions, and in particular his notion of “seeing-as”, which is sometimes also referred to as “aspect seeing”. Indeed, it seems plausible to say that pictures never show things in general, but always only in a certain respect, from a certain point of view or under a certain aspect. Besides, what holds true for pictorial representation seems equally valid for the stance taken in front of pictures: looking at pictures requires seeing them in a certain way, that is, as pictures. Considering Edward Hopper’s Nighthawks (1942) as a rectangular object made of oil, canvas, and stretcher bars does not exactly correspond to the kind of vision pictures generally require (Fig. 29.29.1). Pictures, in that respect, usually present themselves as objects that should be seen as depictions of something else they are about, and in the case of the Hopper painting, say, of a late-night scene in an American diner, with four human figures seen through a wedge of glass. Other descriptions would be possible too, of course, such as one which would present Hopper’s 1942 painting as a depiction of solitude in high industrial modernity.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Aldrich, Virgil C. 1958. “Pictorial Meaning, Picture-Thinking, and Wittgenstein’s Theory of Aspects”. Mind, 67: 70–79.
Alloa, Emmanuel. 2021. Thinking Through Images. A Phenomenology of Visual Media. New York: Columbia University Press.
Asmuth, Christoph. 2006. “Die Als-Struktur Des Bildes [The As-Structure of the Image]”. IMAGE. Journal of Interdisciplinary Image Science, 3: 62–73.
Danto, Arthur C. 1992. “Animals as Art Historians”. In: Beyond the Brillo Box. The Visual Arts in Post-Historical Perspective. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Day, William and Krebs, Víctor J. (eds.). 2010. Seeing Wittgenstein Anew. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Farocki, Harun. 2004. “Phantom Images”. Public, 29: 12–24.
Gebauer, Gunter. 2010. “Sich-Zeigen Und Sehen Als. Wittgensteins Zwei Bildkonzepte”. In: Zeigen. Die Rhetorik Des Sichtbaren. Ed. by Gottfried Boehm, Sebastian Egenhofer, and Christian Spies. München: Wilhelm Fink.
Gombrich, Ernst H. 1969 [1967]. “The Evidence of Images”. In: Interpretation: Theory and Practice. Ed. by Charles S. Singleton. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Gombrich, Ernst H. 1978. Meditations on a Hobby Horse: And Other Essays on the Theory of Art. 3rd ed. London and New York: Phaidon.
Gombrich, Ernst H. 1984 [1960]. Art and Illusion: A Study in the Psychology of Pictorial Representation. London: Phaidon Press.
Goodman, Nelson. 1976. Languages of Art: An Approach to a Theory of Symbols. Revised 2nd. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Hoel, Aurora A.S. 2020. “Images as Active Powers for Reality A Simondonian Approach to Medical Imaging”. In: Dynamis of the Image. Moving Images in a Global World. Ed. by Emmanuel Alloa and Chiara Cappelletto. Berlin and New York: De Gruyter.
Hopkins, Robert. 2010. “Inflected Pictorial Experience: Its Treatment and Significance”. In: Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction, ed. by Catherine Abell and Katerina Bantinaki. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Husserl, Edmund. 1980. Phantasie, Bildbewußtsein, Erinnerung: zur Phänomenologie der anschaulichen Vergegenwärtigungen. Texte aus dem Nachlaß (1898–1925). Ed. by Eduard Marbach. Hua, XXIII. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Husserl, Edmund. 2005. Phantasy, Image Consciousness, and Memory, 1898–1925. Ed. by John B. Brough. Collected Works/Edmund Husserl, v. 11. Dordrecht: Springer.
Hyman, John. 2006. The Objective Eye: Color, Form, and Reality in the Theory of Art. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Krämer, Sybille. 2017. “Why Notational Iconicity Is a Form of Operational Iconicity”. In: Iconicity in Language and Literature. Ed. by Angelika Zirker, Matthias Bauer, Olga Fischer, and Christina Ljungberg. Vol. 15. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Levinson, Jerrold. 1998. “Wollheim on Pictorial Representation”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 56 (3): 227.
Lopes, Dominic. 2004. Understanding Pictures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. 1993. Merleau-Ponty Aesthetics Reader, ed. by Galen Johnson and Michael B. Smith. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University Press.
Mersch, Dieter. 2006. “Wittgensteins Bilddenken”. Deutsche Zeitschrift Für Philosophie, 54(6): 925–42.
Nanay, Bence. 2010. “Inflected and Uninflected Perception of Pictures”. In: Philosophical Perspectives on Depiction. Ed. by Catherine Abell and Katerina Bantinaki. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Polanyi, Michael. 1970. “What Is a Painting?” British Journal of Aesthetics, 10 (3): 225–36.
Richtmeyer, Ulrich. 2019. Wittgensteins Bilddenken: 12 Studien zur Philosophie des Bildes. Paderborn: Wilhelm Fink.
Sartre, Jean-Paul. 2004 [1940]. The Imaginary: A Phenomenological Psychology of the Imagination. Trans. by J. Webber. London and New York: Routledge.
Vinci, Leonardo da. 2008. Notebooks. Ed. by Irma A. Richter and Thereza Wells. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.
Watanabe, Shigeru; Junko Sakamoto, and Masumi Wakita. 1995. “Pigeon’s Discrimination of Paintings by Monet and Picasso”. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 63 (2): 165–74. https://doi.org/10.1901/jeab.1995.63-165.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1982. Letzte Schriften über die Philosophie der Psychologie. Bd. 1. Remarks on the philosophy of psychology. Vol. 1. Ed. by Henrik Von Wright and Heikki Nyman. Trans. by C. G. Luckhardt and Maximilian A.E. Aue. Oxford: Blackwell.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1993. Philosophical Investigations. Ed. by Joachim Schulte and P.M.S. Hacker. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Wollheim, Richard. 1968. Art and Its Objects. New York: Harper & Row.
Wollheim, Richard. 1980. “Seeing-as, Seeing-in, and Pictorial Representation”. In: Art and Its Objects. With Six Supplementary Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wollheim, Richard. 1998. “On Pictorial Representation”. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 56 (3): 217–26.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Alloa, E. (2021). Seeing-as, Seeing-in, Seeing-with: Looking Through Pictures. In: Purgar, K. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Image Studies. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71830-5_29
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71830-5_29
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-71829-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-71830-5
eBook Packages: Literature, Cultural and Media StudiesLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)