On the linguistic challenges of philosophical image studies
Anne Koskinen, Blind Painting, marble, 35 x 26 x 2,5 cm, front (on the left), back (on the right), photo Jussi Tiainen
A text by Anne Koskinen
In our everyday lives, we use words in the belief that we know what they mean. We are able to communicate fluently with each other partly because we do not always ask what the expressions we use actually mean. The use of language in philosophy must also be based on this kind of intuitive understanding. It is neither possible nor appropriate to define every word in research–not to mention the fact that by defining individual words we do not achieve an understanding of the meaning of whole sentences and texts. The intuitive use of language brings to research not only an interpretative quality, but also a fluency that we are familiar with in everyday communication situations.
The tools of philosophical inquiry are concepts. To be able to talk and write about concepts, we need to “put them into words”. In their search for suitable expressions, philosophers pick up words from the everyday language we all use.1 Sometimes their questions sound astonishingly simple. For example, the question What is a picture? can be passed over as obvious as the air we breathe–surprisingly, in the fields of research, art and art education.2 However, the fundamental nature of the question is revealed when we discover that we don’t really know what the question means. It is this kind of reflection that leads us towards the core of philosophical image studies.
The study of images and pictures has a long tradition in German-language research, which is reflected in the many ways in which Bild is understood in the continuum between art and everyday life. On the one hand, Bild (English image, picture) has been defined very narrowly as a two-dimensional representation, including paintings, drawings and photographs.4 This definition excludes three-dimensional representations such as sculptures, although the German word Bild originally also meant sculpture, as the word Bildhauer (English sculptor) still recalls today.5 On the other hand, Bild has been defined contextually. This means that in the right context, almost anything can become an image.6
The German-language Bildwissenschaft (English Image Studies, Image Science) starts from the question Was ist ein Bild? (English What is a picture?, What is a picture?). The fact that images are studied using language is seen as a kind of paradox in image studies.8 After all, the special quality of images is typically thought to lie in the way they differ from language. At the same time, the hegemony of English in research has made image researchers aware of the specificity of German-language image studies.10
The question of Was ist ein Bild? cannot be translated as such into English, as there is no (single) equivalent for the word Bild (cf. English image, picture). The German concept of Bild can be described as both holistic and dynamic in ways that the English equivalents cannot. Bild not only encompasses both the material and the immaterial image. It is also linked to several other dimensions of meaning, such as the processual nature of the image and the active nature of perceiving and making an image (e.g. German bilden, bildend, bildende Kunst, Gebilde), without forgetting the proximity of Bild to imagination (German Einbildungskraft), knowledge and culture (e.g. German gebildet, der/die Gebildete, Bildung).
Image researchers draw on the vocabulary of the language(s) they use, exploiting the relationship of words to their neighbours, their etymologies, their word histories and their word formation processes. Thus, the very formulation and framing of research questions depends on the language in which the research is conducted.11 A contrastive study of the different vocabularies and conceptualisations of image research can help us to understand the ways in which linguistic expressions and concepts interact.12 Image research is an excellent example of how linguistic and cultural diversity contributes to diversity of thought and research. Instead of the hegemony of a single language, global image research requires a dialogue of languages, a decolonised polylogue.
This text, written for the purpose of popularizing science, was first published in Finnish on Instagram. The text is based on:
Koskinen, Anne 2021: Die Felder der Bilder: Das Lexem Bild in den Bildwissenschaften, der Kunst und Johann Königs Werk “Blinder Galerist”. University of Helsinki.
________________________
1 The language of research, in turn, is a special language that differs from the general language, for example in the use of terms (Tieteen termipankki 22.11.2022: Terminologiaoppi:erikoiskieli). When a linguistic expression such as the word image is used in research to represent a specialised concept, it becomes a scientific term (Tieteen termipankki 24.11.2022: Kielitiede:termi).
2 Elkins 2011: VII.
3 Bredekamp 2003.
4 On the image as a two-dimensional representation (German zweidimensionale Darstellung), see Wenzel 2018: 19; cf. Jahn & Haubenreißer 1995: 91.
5 For more on the etymology of the word Bild, see DWDS 25.11.2022: s.v. Bild.
6 On the context-bound conception of the image, see Mersch & Ruf 2014: 1.
7 Boehm 1994.
8 Frank & Lange 2010: 17.
9 See e.g. Boehm 2007.
10 See e.g. Elkins & Naef 2011: 53-62; Klug & Stöckl 2016: XII-XIII; Elkins 2020: 27, 153-164.
13 See e.g. Müller 2007; Elkins 2011, 2020; Elkins & Naef 2011; Wyss 2014.
12 Koskinen 2021.