12 чер. Title Slide of Michel foucault-esto-no-es-una-pipa-ensayo-sobre-magritte. – Download as PDF File .pdf) or read online. Michel Foucault was born on October 15, , in Poitiers, France, and was educated at the Sorbonne, in Paris. He taught at colleges all across Europe.
|Published (Last):||12 January 2013|
|PDF File Size:||19.14 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||15.20 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Esto no es una pipa: ensayo sobre Magritte – Michel Foucault – Google Books
Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Refresh and try again.
This is Not a Pipe by Michel Foucault
Open Preview See a Problem? Ensayo sobre Magritte by Michel Foucault. Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. Preview — Esto no es una pipa. Esto no es una pipa. Ensayo sobre Magritte by Michel Foucault. Dos versiones de un mismo dibujo de Magritte, Ceci n’est pas une pipe.
En los cuadros de Magritte no se representa, flucault se afirma nada: PaperbackSerie Informal 3394 pages. Published April 18th by Anagrama first published Esnayo see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. To ask other readers questions about Esto no es una pipa. Ensayo sobre Magritteplease sign up. Be the first to ask a question about Magritye no es una pipa.
Esto no es una pipa. Ensayo sobre Magritte
Lists with This Book. This book is not yet featured on Listopia. This book also throws a new, piquantly dancing light on Foucault himself. This is not a review. View all 8 comments. Where have you been? We never see you on FB any more. Oct 17, Stefano Ugliano Oh boy. Dec 30, Aug 24, ilknur a.
View all 3 comments. I am not the kind of person who reads social theory for fun.
This is Not a Pipe
There foucailt moments, however, when I feel like I’m stuck in such a deep rut, that life is so deeply mired in the mundanity that I need something to make me think — really think — about something outside myself, outside the daily routine, outside politics and the urgent fear and despair of humanity.
And so I find myself reading Foucault, not because I like him, but because me forces me radically out of my own interior space and into his I am not the kind of person who reads social theory for fun. And so I find myself reading Foucault, not because I like him, but because me magtitte me radically out of sobr own interior space and into his, and in doing so he makes me think about art and its power to subvert and transform, to shatter the discourses that shackle it.
Art, he leads me to believe, is the one redeeming thing we have, the only way to escape reality, and in sore reality, to bend it into something else, fouucault create something that is both lens and mirror all at once, to reveal truth in the midst of distorting resemblance. My only disappointment is that my French is not strong enough to read this in the original, where I suspect based on the translator’s note that it is a funny, playful piece.
I can’t fault the translator too much — the thing about humor is that it’s the true barometer of whether you understand a language, and in so many respects it simply doesn’t translate without so much explication as to render it deadpan, or worse, frustrating. And I wonder also whether in the original, to someone fluent, Foucault is a slightly less dense read ensaoy if some of the complexities of reading Foucault sometimes foucult herculean task arise in part from a use of language on his part so precise that even the best translation will lose some of its saturation, will labor to reproduce the ideas, turning the smooth functioning mgaritte his thought into a limping, juddering machine.
Or maybe it’s just me. In any case, I am not widely read enough to comment extensively on the relative importance of the ideas dnsayo. I am familiar with a small range of Foucault’s work Discipline and Punish; The History of Sexuality; Madness and Civilization; governmentalityand so I can see how the threads of discourse bound this work and frame it from a distance, but it reads in a very different vein than those works more familiar to me.
His discussion of calligrams, of representation and similitude: There are echoes of Baudrillard here, though from a slightly different perspective — less biting perhaps; rather than a media trap, simulation is presented as empowering. And this is crucial: And that, for now, must be enough. One easy way to answer “Why read this book” is: Yet a more favorable answer would be; to learn how to think surreal, how to see a different, new dimension, one where art magrktte more forms than humanly understandable, or one that isn’t only based on automatism, but magrittr that to dobre point where the very definition of art, base, limits, and all such vocabulary, is defined by the artist himself, by the uniqueness and the singularity of himself.
A new dimension One easy way to answer “Why read this book” is: A new dimension where paradox is a god, where perfection is cleared out by a statement so simple that it might not even be noticeable for a man of no sight in such a dimension.
This “kind” of art is indeed one of humanity, of extreme complication and simplicity. The book defies the term contradiction, explains it, and changes the way you look at it, just as it does ensaayo a dozen other day to day terms.
This was my eye opener. I still have a long way to fully understand this book, and I doubt I ever will, That’s why Five out of five is barely enough.
This is not a book as much as an essay, really. Following soon after his seminal work, The Order of Things Les Mots et les chosesFoucault’s essay not only offers a insightful study of Magritte’s famous Treachery of Images Ceci n’est pas une pipeit also provides an introduction to the French philosopher himself. A love letter to Magritte.
In margitte analysis of the painting of the same name: The point of articulation: From painting to image, from image to text, from text to voice, a sort of imaginary pointer indicates, shows, fixes, locates, imposes a system of references, tries to stabilize a unique space. By resemblance we demonstrate and speak across difference: Quite a bit of this, for a short essay. Foucault is a difficult read. Magrittf concepts and language require much of the reader, making re-readings and multiple contemplations frequent requirements.
So why is he so intent to make us read so much of it unnecessarily? On the contrary, its reconsideration of the meaning of representation and magrittee is both thought-provoking and whimsical in sobrf best meaning of that word. Ensyao said, what is covered and re-covered is a quite ingenious examination of the nature of art and its representation of the original.
Where Foucault stumbles and drags is in his thankfully limited treatment of Kandinsky and Klee, whose work receives short shrift via a greatly underdeveloped evaluation of their integration of representations, essentially serving as rather weak counterpoints to Magritte. Nevertheless, this short and useless digression aside, Pipe is a challenging and occasionally frustrating consideration of our concepts of reality, perceptions, images and the manner in which they are all represented in art and in the focault.
This book was quiet interesting. When looking at Rene Magritte’s Painting of maritte pipe and underneath this painting in neat script is written “Ceci n’est pas une pipe” which is french for “This is not a Pipe. It may foycault be surrealistic art but Michel Foucault really shows us his deep thoughts about this painting and its meaning.
If you were to see this people might just say that it is nonsensical, i too thought this, yet now i think differently about this artw This book sobrs quiet interesting. If you were to see this people might just say that it is nonsensical, i too thought this, yet now i think differently about this artwork. I think that it is saying that this drawing of the pipe is not the pipe itself.
Foucault starts off the book with the explanation of how the text below the pipe even associates the pipe at all. Think of it as a algebra but including words instaid of a any operational foucauly. Let me use “P” to stand for the pipe. He says that maybe it can be seen this way: Or it can also be looked at: This book was very interesting and I enjoyed reading it. This review has been hidden because it contains spoilers. To view it, click here. Foucault borrowed the concept of calligramme to illustrate how Magritte’s painting “This is not a pipe” unites semiotic symbols and picture, and also employed the concepts of resemblance and similarity to present this painting as a perfect representation of “ideas” and a rebellion against paintings pursuing similarity However Magritte understands it as an affirmation, in the mzgritte and confusion caused by the words and picture, a truthful image of the object focuault in the audience’s mind.
The first ‘text’ of Foucault I’ve read in its entirety. Despite its brevity, it’s still a little slow going Foucault shows how Magritte’s paintings of pipes function in several ways decomposed calligram, network of signifying signs all referring back to each other Magritte writes, ‘It seems to me that, for example, green pe The first ‘text’ of Foucault I’ve read in its entirety.
Magritte writes, ‘It seems to me that, for example, green peas have between them relations of similitude, at once visible their color, form, size and invisible their nature, taste, weight. It is the same for the false and the real, etc. Things do not have resemblances, they do or do not have similitudes. It resembles by being what it sees, hears, or knows; it becomes what the world magrutte it.
And can that myth be broken apart? I’ll definitely return to this work in the future and hopefully will get more out of it in the future. Foucault and myself have a generally strained relationship. I’m ensauo exactly sure why. I think that it may have to do with some extremely graphic descriptions of torture. The book did not have any such descriptions making it seem to be getting off on a much better foot.