Dear Francesca and JMC,
What Peirce writes is:
"An icon is a sign which would possess the character that renders it
significant, even though its object had no existence; such as a lead-pencil
streak as representing a geometrical line."
JMC: Peirce's point is that an icon can only be a sign through some quality
(a quality that it possesses). In essence this means that it is a mere
possible (a quality being something that MAY be predicated to an object,
that MAY come into existence). Consequently pure icons do not exist (for
existence implies actuality, manifestation). Thus, as pure icons have
qualitative (i.e. possible, non-existing) objects, their signhood must be
independent from the existence of any object (which does not mean that such
objects are not real. Existence and reality for Peirce are two very
different things. Peirce saw himself as an extreme Realist of the Scottist
brand). In any case, this is why Peirce posits hypoicons -- which are
actual signs which owe their signhood not to their existence (nor to that
of their object) but to some quality they embody. All of this is related to
Peirce's phenomenology and his treatment of the Categories (Firstness,
Seconsdess, Thirdness).
Francesca: the fact that an icon (a hypoicon) may be used on the basis of a
convention according to which something is said to resemble something else
does not invalidate the categorial principles and the architectonic of the
Categories. Resemblance is not, in itself, a semiotic fact (on this precise
point Nelson Goodman is right). It only becomes so when it forms the basis
for sign use. Thus icons are different from indices and symbols (although
symbols may have an iconic aspect to them) -- the grounds on which they
become semiotic facts are different. I've always felt that Eco fails to
distinguish resemblance from sign use, claiming that if resemblance is
conventional tnen it must follow that any sign that is based on resemblance
must also be conventional. However the argument slips from non-semiotic
fact to semiotic fact, and in doing so misconstrues the icon (and the
index).
Martin Lefebvre
------------------------------
Martin Lefebvre
Associate Professor
Editor RECHERCHES SEMIOTIQUES/
SEMIOTIC INQUIRY
Mel Hoppenheim School of Cinema
Concordia University
FB 319
1455 de Maisonneuve, West
Montreal (Quebec), Canada
H3G 1M8
tel. (514) 848-4676/FAX. (514) 848-4255
Groupe de recherche Peirce/Wittgenstein (UQAM)
------------------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|