These are preserved and
integrated in the symbolism of a community.
Purely pictorial signs, as in Chinese and Japanese writing,
relate to the structure of language, and are culturally
significant. No matter to which extent such pictorial signs are
refined-and indeed, characters in Chinese and Kanji are
extremely sophisticated- they maintain a relation to what they
refer to. They extend the experience of writing, especially in
calligraphic exercise, in the experience conveyed. We can impose
on images-and I do not refer only to Chinese ideograms-the logic
embodied in language. But once we do, we alter the condition of
the image and transform it into an illustration.
Language, in its embodiment in literacy, is an analytic tool and
supports analytic practice quite well. Images have a dominantly
synthetic character and make for good composite tools.
Synthesizing activities, especially designing, an object, a
message, or a course of action, imply the participation of
images, in particular powerful diagramming and drawing. Language
describes; images constitute. Language requires a context for
understanding, in which classes of distribution are defined.
Images suggest such a context. Given the individual character of
any image, the equivalent of a distributional class for a
language simply does not exist.
To look at an image, for whatever practical or theoretical
purpose, means to relate to the method of the image, not to its
components.
Pages:
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464