> <snip>
>
> I wouldn't put it quite that way. Surely *interpretation* (induction,
> abduction and worse) doesn't operate upon full information but rather in
its
> absence? To array data is to summon into being some sort of ideology.
You been peeking at my thesis, Christopher?
I don't know that I'd equate adduction with interpretation. I think
adduction is a highly important thinking phase -- important enough to
campaign for 'abduction' to be spelt 'adduction' on the grounds that a) it's
what Peirce meant and b) to avoid confusion with extraordinary rendition and
stolen children. Far from being 'worse' than induction (if I interpret your
list as a progression) it is, as Peirce says, the only logical mode that is
creative: "In this way we gain new ideas; but there is no force in the
reasoning. .Abduction furnishes all our ideas concerning real things, beyond
what are given in perception, but is mere conjecture, without probative
force."
There's an association with 'surprise', which is where the fields we've been
discussing come in, because in each case, kitsch, camp, sentimentality etc.
there's a sense that the witness is ahead of the performer -- that the
performer is, if you like, more surprised than the witness, which isn't "how
it's meant to be".
> <snip>
>
> All of that. At some level there's a connection between Bourdieu's
'cultural
> capital' and Marx's 'general intellect'. The key, presumably, is
> *appropriation*.
Anyone got a good definition of 'appropriation'? I associate the term with
use being made of someone else's property under conditions of contention,
but often see it used in a modality that is closer to 'recycling'.
>
> <snip>
> If [Brendel] takes issue with a composer being immersed in the popular
> culture of his day ... [MW]
> <snip>
He doesn't; he just remarks on it.
>
> Surely kitsch is the commodification of high culture (of which Vivaldi in
> lifts is certainly an example) not the appropriation of low or popular
> culture?
Surely the notion of "high" & "low" is the cultural equivalent of Cartesian
dualism, which ought to be behind us by now?
A curiosity, though: how were the iconic products of the pre-movable-type
printing press in roughly 14th/15th century Europe received? Some of these
would possibly seem in some respects kitschy.
P
|