previous | | 2.7.8 (163) | contents


 The circle serves well as an abstract demarcation of category or a concrete index of subjectivity. While “by definition non­-metamorphosable,” Poulet tells us, it “adapts itself [to] changes of meaning [and] manner by which human beings represent their [self­-aware] relationship with the inner and the outer worlds; their consciousness of space and duration.” To reckon its historical reach, Wolfgang Wildgen spans the compass of our Cro­-Magnon ancestors: “A first perspective is centrifugal, i.e., starting form the self and its basic bodily motions an experienced three­-dimensional space is cognized ... where objects may be approached, reached and manipulated.” By infusing inner/outer statics with inward/outward dynamics, he widens the scope of our ‘in/out’ schema; adapting terms from mechanical force to causative agency, he puts a topological spin on an anthropocentric model: “The second perspective is centripetal, i.e., the self is seen as the place of effects triggered by external causes. The sky, the horizon, [the winds, the] mountains may be the external locus of orientation for the self, who is at the center of a force field or gradient implicit in these delimitations.” 

index | 2.7.9 (164) | | next


 To correlate modalities and criteria, we project the fig.62 Rows (above) from our central knowledge to our circumferential ignorance: “Many myths and religions refer to this extreme locus of orientation as they interpret the fate of humans as standing under the control of such distant (and often invisible) forces.” The polarity of phenomenal and noumenal orders has stuck with us as our compass, on point and through pivot—but with decisive dissymmetry: as Lacan protests, “it is not between the visible and the invisible that we have to pass.” The subject is not only split by those “forms imposed by the world towards which the intentionality of phenomenological experience directs us” but also by the gaze, “presented to us only in the form of a strange contingency, symbolic of what we find on the horizon”—and yet, “in its autonomyqua anamorphosis, “we can seek its track, its thread, its trace, at every stage of the constitution of the world, in the scopic field.” While it “institutes us by the same token as speculum mundi”, this ‘mirror of the world’ reflects “the phantasy to be found in the Platonic perspective of an absolute being to whom is transferred the quality of being all­-seeing.”

© 2008-2012 Ian C Thorne. all rights reserved. about credits privacy contact share