Abstract
In the age of the slide projectors everybody could easily experience the mistake of a slide loaded upside down or left-right inverted: what should be up is down, and vice versa; what should be on the right appears on the left, and vice versa. If in the case of the upside down inversion the acknowledgment of the error is almost instantaneous, in the case of an inverted laterality things might be trickier and the right disposition not so easy to detect. Back in the Twenties of the last century, Heinrich Wölfflin not only was a pioneer in adopting the double projector for the comparison of images, but also was one of the first art historians and theorists to reflect upon that mistake and the crucial consequences—syntactic, semantic, symbolic, pragmatic—of the lateral inversion of images. Such an inversion does not only occur when misusing an optical device like the projector, but is also a structural element in the “controparte” relationship between an original drawing and a derived image (tapestry or engravings, for example), and an exploratory procedure in the preliminary studies of the postures of the characters prepared by major and minor artists. Moreover, it frequently appears in cases of homage, plagiarism, copy and fake. In my paper I will address the question of lateral inversion in images on the background of a more general account of laterality as a crucial factor in human experience as referred to the human being as an animal which is organized according to a bilateral symmetry around a vertical axis. Such an organization impacts on manifold levels: from the physiological to the mythical, from the neurological to the symbolic, from the chemical to the aesthetic (both in the sense of a theory of art and of a theory of bodily knowledge).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
“Wie anders würden unsere Wörter, Begriffe und Gedanken sich bilden, wenn unser Körper, statt beiderseits symmetrisch, fünfstrahlig angeordnet wäre wie der Seestern oder sechsstrahlig wie die Lilie”. Translation mine.
- 2.
“Man sagt Ort und Ende, man sagt erörtern, die Ursache wissen wenig, allein man verstehet es aus der Sprache der Berg-Leute, bey denen ist Ort so viel als Ende, so weit nemlich der Stollen, der Schacht oder die Strecke getrieben, man sagt zum Exempel: Dieser Bergmann arbeitet vor dem Ort, das ist, wo es auffhöret, daher erörtern nichts anders ist, als endigen (definire)”. Translation mine.
- 3.
For a discussion on Kant’s theory of the incongruent counterparts see the essays collected in Van Cleve and Frederick (1991).
- 4.
In his lecture on symmetry (quoting Kant’s Prolegomena) Mach has recourse to mirror images in order to illustrate the phenomenon of the incongruent counterparts: “Hold your right hand before a mirror, and you will see in the mirror a left hand. Your right glove will produce its mate in the glass. For you could never use the reflexion of your right glove, if it were present to you as a real thing, for covering your right hand, but only for covering your left. Similarly, your right ear will give as its reflexion a left ear; and you will at once perceive that the left half of your body could very easily be substituted for the reflexion of your right half” (Mach 1871: 93).
- 5.
“Quand je veux une déviation à droite, je choisis les cristaux hémyèdres à gauche; quand je veux une déviation à gauche, je choisis les cristaux hémyèdres à droite”. Translation mine.
- 6.
On Kelvin’s coin (and on some misunderstandings about its first occurrence) see Bentley (2010). On its employment in chemical terminology see Cintas (2007). For a historical reconstruction see Bock and Marsh (1991). The journal Chirality, published since 1989, hosts contributions on molecular asymmetry of chemical, pharmacological and toxicological interest.
- 7.
For a general overview of the polarization “left/right” in Greek philosophy see Lloyd 1962.
- 8.
- 9.
- 10.
- 11.
On Hertz see Parkin (1996).
- 12.
Many, although not all, cultures show this privilege of the right hand. See the essays collected in Bachofen (1967) for the pre-eminence of the left side in the archaic gynaecocracies. Granet (1933, 1934) has rejected an interpretation of Chinese laterality on the basis of the Western opposition “left/right”. For a general overview of the lateral polarization in different cultures see Needham (1973).
- 13.
- 14.
“Der Beschauer ist gewöhnt, ein Bild zu lesen wie die Schrift von links nach rechts”. Translation mine.
- 15.
“Man könnte meinen, daß unsere Kunst – im Sinne unserer Schrift – immer die Neigung haben müßte, einen objektiven Bewegungszug (marschierende Soldaten, rennende Pferde) von links nach rechts sich entwickeln zu lassen. So ist es nicht. Aber das ist sicher, daß die rechte Bildseite einen anderen Stimmungswert hat als die linke. Es entscheidet über die Stimmung des Bildes, wie es nach recht ausgeht. Gewissermaßen wird dort das letzte Wort gesprochen”. Translation mine.
- 16.
For a general survey see: Pinotti (2010).
References
Aristotle. (1985). The complete works. (J. Barnes. Ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Arnheim, R. (1974). Art and visual perception. A psychology of the creative eye (2nd edn.). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Asimov, I. (1972). The left hand of the electron. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.
Bachofen, J. J. (1967). Myth, religion, and mother right: Selected writings. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.
Beaton, A. (1985). Left side, right side. A review of laterality research. London: Batsford Academic and Educational.
Bentley, R. (2010). Chiral: A confusing etymology. Chirality, 22(1), 1–2.
Benton, A. L. (1976). Historical development of the concept of hemispheric cerebral dominance. In S. F. Spicker and H. Tristram Engelhardt (Eds.), Philosophical dimensions of the neuro-medical sciences (pp. 33–57). Dordrecht: Springer.
Bertrand, P. M. (2001). Histoire des gauchers: des gens à l’envers. Paris: Imago.
Bianki, V. L. (1988). The right and left hemispheres of the animal brain: Celebral lateralization of function. New York: Gordon and Breach.
Bock, G. R., & Marsh, J. (eds.). (1991). Biological asymmetry and handedness. Chichester: Wiley.
Broca, P. P. (1861a). Perte de la parole, ramollissement chronique et destruction partielle du lobe antérieur gauche du cerveau. Bulletin de la Société Anthropologique de Paris, 2, 235–238.
Broca, P. P. (1861b). Remarks on the seat of the faculty of articulated language, following an observation of aphemia (Loss of speech). Bulletin de la Société Anatomique, 6, 330–357.
Cassirer, E. (1923). The philosophy of symbolic forms (Vol. 1) “Language”. (R. Manheim, Trans.). New Haven & London: Yale University Press. 1955.
Cassirer, E. (1924). The philosophy of symbolic forms (Vol. 2) “Mythical Thought”. (R. Manheim, Trans.). New Haven & London: Yale University Press. 1955.
Cassirer, E. (1929). The philosophy of symbolic forms (Vol. 3) “The phenomenology of knowledge” (R. Manheim, Trans.). New Haven & London: Yale University Press. 1957.
Cassirer, E. (1931). Mythic, aesthetic and theoretical space. (D. P. Verene and L. H. Foster, Trans.). Man and World 2/1, 1969: 13–17.
Cintas, P. (2007). Tracing the origins and evolution of chirality and handedness in chemical language. Angewandte Chemie, 46(22), 4016–4024.
Corballis, M. C., & Beale, I. L. (1983). The ambivalent mind: Neuropsychology of left and right. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
Critchley, S. M. (1964). La controverse de Dax et Broca. Revue neurologique, 110, 553–557.
Dax, M. (1865). Lésions de la moitié gauche de l’encéphale coïncident avec l’oubli des signes de la pensée (lu à Montpellier en 1836). Bulletin hebdomadaire de médecine et de chirurgie, 2, 259–262.
Faistauer, A. (1926). Links und Rechts im Bilde. Amicis. Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Galerie, 1, 77–78.
Gaffron, M. (1950). Right and left in pictures. Art Quarterly, 13, 312–331.
Gamkrelidze, T. V., & Ivanov, V. V. (1984). Indo-European and the Indo-Europeans: A reconstruction and historical analysis of a proto-language and a proto-culture (2 Vols) (J. Nichols, Trans.). Berlin: De Gruyter. 1995.
Granet, M. (1933). La droite et la gauche en Chine. Bullettin de l’Institut Français de Sociologie, 3(3), 87–116.
Granet, M. (1934). La pensée chinoise. Paris: Albin Michel.
Heidegger, M. (1927). Being and time. (J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson, Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 1985.
Hertz, R. (1909). The pre-eminence of the right hand: A study in religious polarity. In Death and the right hand (R. and C. Needham, Trans.) (pp. 89–113). London and New York: Routledge. 2004.
Jackson, J. (1905). Ambidexterity, or two-handedness and two-brainedness. An argument for natural development and rational education. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co.
Jünger, E. (1947). Sprache und Körperbau. In Sämtliche Werke (Vol. 12, pp. 47–99). Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta. 1979.
Kandinsky, W. (1926). Point and line to plane. (H. Dearstyne and H. Rebay, Trans.). New York: Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation: Bloomfield Hills (Michigan): Cranbrook Press, 1947.
Kant, I. (1768). Concerning the ultimate ground of the differentiation of directions in space. In D. Walford (Ed.), Theoretical philosophy, 1755–1770 (pp. 361–371). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1992.
Kant, I. (1770). On the form and principles of the sensible and the intelligible world. In D. Walford (Ed.), Theoretical philosophy, 1755–1770 (pp. 373–416). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1992.
Kant, I. (1783). Prolegomena to any future metaphysics that will be able to come forward as science. In H. Allison and P. Heath (Eds.), Theoretical philosophy after 1781 (pp. 29–169). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2002.
Kant, I. (1786a). Metaphysical foundations of natural science. In H. Allison and P. Heath (Eds.), Theoretical philosophy after 1781 (pp. 171–270). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2002.
Kant, I. (1786b). What is orientation in thinking? In H. Reiss (Ed.). Political writings (pp. 237–249). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1991.
Leibniz, G. W. (1696–1697). Unvorgreiffliche Gedanken, betreffend die Ausübung und Verbesserung der Teutschen Sprache. Digital edition at: http://www.staff.uni-giessen.de/gloning/tx/lbnz-ug.htm.
Leibniz, G. W. (1703–1705). New essays on human understanding. (P. Remnant and J. Bennett. Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1996.
Levy, J. (1976). Lateral dominance and aesthetic preference. Neuropsychologia, 14, 431–445.
Lloyd, G. E. R. (1962). Right and left in Greek philosophy. The Journal of Hellenic Studies, 82, 55–66.
Lokhorst, G. J. C. (1996). The first theory about hemispheric specialization: Fresh light on an old codex. Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, 51(3), 293–312.
Lombroso, C. (1903). Left-handedness and left-sidedness. The North American Review, 177(562), 440–444.
Mach, E. (1871). On symmetry. In Popular scientific lectures. (T. J. McCormack, Trans.) (pp. 89–106). Chicago: The Open Court Publishing co. 1898.
Mach, E. (1886). The analysis of sensations and the relation of the physical to the psychical (C. M. Williams, Trans.). New York: Dover Publications. 1959.
Mach, E. (1905). Knowledge and error. Sketches on the psychology of enquiry (Th. J. McCormack and P. Foulkes, Trans.). Dordrecht: Reidel. 1976.
Marian, A. (1985). Left, right, hand and brain: The right shift theory. London: Erlbaum.
McManus, C. (2002). Right hand, left hand: The origins of asymmetry in brains, bodies, atoms and cultures. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
Needham, R. (1973). Right and left: Essays on dual symbolic classification. Chicago-London: University of Chicago Press.
Parkin, R. (1996). The dark side of humanity: The work of Robert Hertz and its legacy. Amsterdam: Harwood.
Pasteur, L. (1848). Mémoire sur la relation qui peut exister entre la forme cristalline et la composition chimique, et sur la cause de la polarisation rotatoire. Comptes rendus de l’Académie des Sciences, 26, 535–538.
Pasteur, L. (1860). On the asymmetry of naturally occurring organic compounds. In G. M. Richardson (Ed.), The foundations of stereo chemistry: Memoirs by Pasteur, van’t Hoff, Lebel and Wislicenus (pp. 1–33). New York: American Book Co. 1901.
Pinotti, A. (2010). Il rovescio dell’immagine. Destra e sinistra nell’arte. Mantova: Tre Lune.
Plato. (1997). Complete works. (J. M. Cooper. Ed.). Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett.
Posèq, A. W. (2007). Left & right in painting: And in the related arts. Jerusalem: Academon.
Sattler, J. B. (2000). Links und Rechts in der Wahrnehmung des Menschen: zur Geschichte der Linkshändigkeit. Donauwörth: Auer.
Schapiro, M. (1969). On some problems in the semiotics of visual art: Field and vehicle in image-signs. Simiolus: Netherlands Quarterly for the History of Art 6(1). 1972–1973: 9–19.
von Schlosser, J. (1930). Intorno alla lettura dei quadri. In Xenia: saggi sulla storia dello stile e del linguaggio nell’arte figurativa: 220–232. Bari: Laterza, 1938.
Springer, S. P., & Deutsch, G. (1998). Left brain, right brain: Perspectives from cognitive neuroscience. New York: Freeman.
Thompson, D. W. (1942). On growth and form. The Revised Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Uspensky, B. A. (1973). “Left” and “Right” in Icon Painting. (A. Shukman, Trans.). Semiotica 13(1). 1975: 33–39.
Van Cleve, J., & Frederick, R. E. (1991). The philosophy of right and left. Incongruent counterparts and the nature of space. Dordrecht-Boston-London: Kluwer.
Vico, G. (1744). The new science (Th. G. Bergin and M. H. Fisch, Trans.). Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press. 1948.
Weigel, S. (2001). Die Richtung des Bildes: zum Links-Rechts von Bilderzählung und Bildbeschreibung in kultur- und mediengeschichtlicher Perspektive. Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 64, 449–474.
Wittgenstein, L. (1918). Tractatus logico-philosophicus. (D. F. Pears and B. F. McGuinness, Trans.). London and New York: Routledge. 2001.
Wölfflin, H. (1928). Über das Rechts und Links im Bilde. In Gedanken zur Kunstgeschichte: Gedrucktes und Ungedrucktes, 82–90. Basel: Schwabe. 1947.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pinotti, A. (2017). Invert It If You Want to Understand It. Left and Right in the Mythic and Aesthetic Space. In: Catena, M., Masi, F. (eds) The Changing Faces of Space. Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics, vol 39. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66911-3_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66911-3_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-66910-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-66911-3
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)