The afternoon's dispute began when Mr Blottisham entered the Senior Common Room carrying several colour reproductions and the unmistakable expression of a man preparing to explain pictures to academics.
Professor Quillibrace immediately looked concerned.
"Not another visual grammar discussion."
"Not at all," said Blottisham. "This one concerns method."
"That is even worse."
Miss Elowen Stray glanced up from her notebook.
"What aspect of method?"
"The obvious aspect."
Quillibrace sighed.
"There is rarely anything more dangerous than an obvious aspect."
Mr Blottisham spread the images across a nearby table.
"Observe."
Nobody did.
He continued regardless.
"This image places a bright object in the centre."
"Mm."
"The surrounding colours direct attention toward it."
"Indeed."
"The framing isolates it from the background."
"Quite."
"And from these features we may infer importance."
Quillibrace looked at him.
"May we?"
"Certainly."
"Why?"
"Because the structure suggests it."
"I see."
Blottisham brightened.
"Excellent. Then we agree."
"Not remotely."
Miss Stray smiled.
"I suspect Professor Quillibrace is asking where the explanation begins."
"With the image, obviously."
"Obviously?"
"One looks at the image. One identifies its features. One determines what those features mean."
Quillibrace nodded.
"Exactly."
Blottisham frowned.
"That was not agreement."
"No."
"What was it?"
"A diagnosis."
The rain drifted softly against the windows.
Quillibrace folded his hands.
"What you have described is an extraordinarily common procedure."
"Because it works."
"That remains to be established."
Miss Stray leaned forward.
"The analyst begins with observable form."
"Yes."
"Then infers meanings from those forms."
"Exactly."
"And then perhaps constructs broader categories from repeated observations."
"Now you're getting it."
Quillibrace looked at her.
"You have described the process perfectly."
"Thank you."
"It is also precisely the issue."
Mr Blottisham looked offended.
"I fail to see the problem."
"Of course you do."
"The image is visible."
"Yes."
"The features are visible."
"Indeed."
"The meanings are inferred."
"Quite."
"So where else could one begin?"
Quillibrace smiled.
"That is an excellent question."
"Thank you."
"It has merely led you into the difficulty."
Miss Stray considered the matter.
"In this approach, the image itself functions as the starting point."
"Precisely," said Quillibrace.
"The analyst begins with structure."
"Yes."
"And explanation proceeds upward."
"Correct."
"From visible form to inferred meaning."
Quillibrace nodded.
"What we might call explanation from below."
Blottisham looked puzzled.
"Below what?"
"The system."
A silence settled over the room.
Blottisham stared.
"The system is below the image?"
"No."
"Above it?"
"Yes."
"How can a thing one cannot see be above a thing one can?"
Quillibrace closed his eyes briefly.
"The language is metaphorical."
"Ah."
"Unfortunately the problem is not."
Miss Stray intervened.
"In Halliday's model, explanation begins from meaning potential."
"Exactly."
"And structures are understood as realisations of that potential."
"Yes."
"So one does not start with forms and ask what they mean."
"One starts with systems of meaning and asks how those meanings are actualised."
Blottisham looked at the images.
"That seems backwards."
"Only if visibility determines explanatory priority."
The room grew thoughtful.
Quillibrace continued.
"Consider the difference carefully."
He pointed to one of the reproductions.
"In one approach, we observe a framing device and infer significance."
Blottisham nodded.
"In the other?"
"We begin with the meaning potential available within the semiotic system and explain the framing as a realisation of that potential."
Miss Stray looked thoughtful.
"So the same structure may appear in both analyses."
"Certainly."
"The difference lies in what explains what."
"Precisely."
Blottisham rubbed his chin.
"So when analysts discuss salience, framing, gaze, composition and similar features..."
"They are often constructing interpretations from observed forms."
"Which sounds perfectly reasonable."
"It may be."
"Then why object?"
"Because a plausible interpretation is not necessarily a systemic explanation."
Miss Stray nodded slowly.
"The goal differs."
"Entirely."
"In the first case, success means producing a convincing account of what the image signifies."
"Yes."
"In the second, success means showing how the image functions as the actualisation of a system of meaning."
"Exactly."
Blottisham stared into the middle distance.
"I begin to suspect that two analyses may look remarkably similar while doing entirely different things."
Quillibrace smiled.
"Now we are making progress."
"The same vocabulary might appear in both."
"Certainly."
"Realisation."
"Yes."
"Resource."
"Indeed."
"Choice."
"Quite."
"Metafunction."
"Mm."
"And yet the explanatory movement may still run from form toward meaning."
"Precisely."
Miss Stray closed her notebook.
"So one may borrow systemic-functional terminology while retaining a fundamentally different explanatory orientation."
Quillibrace raised his teacup.
"An observation of uncommon accuracy."
For a while they sat in silence.
At length Blottisham spoke.
"I think I finally understand the distinction."
The others waited.
"The question is not whether structure matters."
"No."
"Nor whether we should describe it."
"Certainly not."
"Nor even whether structural patterns can reveal meaning."
"Go on."
Blottisham gestured toward the images.
"The question is whether these structures are the starting point of explanation or the thing being explained."
Miss Stray smiled.
"Exactly."
Quillibrace nodded approvingly.
"A rare achievement."
"What is?"
"You have managed to distinguish an object of analysis from an explanation of that object."
Blottisham looked pleased.
"That sounds important."
"It is the difference," said Quillibrace, "between cataloguing the visible and explaining why the visible takes the form it does."
The rain continued beyond the windows.
And somewhere in the distance, another inventory of framing devices quietly mistook itself for a theory.
No comments:
Post a Comment