Symbole w działaniu. Akademickie konteksty nurtu symbolicznego w antropologii

Niniejsza publikacja podejmuje problem, który jest dla antropologii symbolicznej fundamentalny. Jest nim ukazanie tego, jak w ramach tego kierunku ujmowano kwestię działań o charakterze symbolicznym oraz tego, jak działają same symbole w kulturze. Równie istotnym problemem wiążącym się ze sposobem pojmowania przez ten nurt powyższych kwestii jest jego uwarunkowanie kontekstualne. Chodzi w tym miejscu nie tylko o źródła naukowych inspiracji, ale również o mniej oczywiste czynniki kształtujące teoretyczne stanowiska Geertza czy Turnera. Antropologia symboliczna stanowiła część paradygmatu interpretacyjnego. To właśnie wpływ wiążącego się ze zwrotem interpretacyjnym klimatu intelektualnego, jak też instytucjonalne oddziaływanie wspomnianych powyżej ośrodków akademickich jest najbardziej interesujące. Historyczno-naukowa kontekstualizacja określonych prądów naukowych wywiera wpływ na kształt realizowanych w ich ramach teorii w takim samym stopniu, co relacje pomiędzy stanowiskami poszczególnych badaczy i ich autorskie programy antropologiczne.

"My" i "oni", "swój" i "obcy". Bałkany XX wieku z perspektywy kolonialnej i postkolonialnej

W artykule został przeanalizowany dyskurs bałkański XX wieku z kolonialnego i postkolonialnego punktu widzenia. Pierwsza część przybliża geopolityczny stosunek do Bałkanów,The Balans in the Gaze of Western Travellers (2004) jako przykłady korygującego wobec istniejących dotychczas reprezentacji i wyobrażeń Bałkanów. skupia się jednak nie tylko na nazwie geograficznej Półwysep Bałkański, lecz przede wszystkim na figuratywnym i metaforycznym języku, bazującym na stereotypach i negatywnych „etykietkach” Bałkanów, takich jak: „beczka prochu”, obszar „zadawnionej nienawiści”, „zderzenie cywilizacji”, „strefa rozłamu”, europejskie „jądro ciemności”, „dzika Europa”, „jeszcze- nie” Europa. Ten stosunek opiera się na opozycji My-Oni z kolonialnego, punktu widzenia Zachodu. W drugiej części tekstu zostaje przeprowadzona analiza trzech utworów prozatorskich autorstwa wybitnych pisarzy z Bałkanów – chorwacki dyskurs literacki jest reprezentowany przez Miroslava Krležę w opowiadaniu W Dreźnie. Mister Wu San Pej interesuje się problemem serbsko-chorwackim (1924), serbski dyskurs przedstawia Ivo Andrić w opowiadaniu List z roku 1920 (1946), natomiast bośniacki – Nenad Veličković i jego powieść epistolarna Sahib. Impresje z depresji (2001). Te trzy dyskursy z różnych przełomowych dla Jugosławii okresów pokazują, że pisarze chętnie sięgali po figurę „Obcego”, by uwypuklić problemy związane z własną złożoną, często zwielokrotnioną tożsamością. Ostatnia część akcentuje nowe, postkolonialne podejście do problemu Bałkanów – uczestniczą w nim wybitni naukowcy pochodzący z tego regionu, którzy zrobili kariery w Europie Zachodniej i USA. W tej części zostają zaprezentowane trzy fundamentalne dla tego problemu książki – studium Marii Todorowej (Bułgarka) Imagining the Balkans (1997), monografia Vesny Bjelogrlić-Goldsworthy (Serbka) Inventing Ruritania: The Imperializm of the Imagination (1998) oraz antropologiczna książka Božidara Jezernika (Słoweniec) Wild Europe.

O antropomorfizowaniu i potrzebie przedstawień figuralnych w sztuce greckiej

Estetyka w archeologii. Antropomorfizacje w pradziejach i starożytności, eds. E. Bugaj, A. P. Kowalski, Poznań: Wydawnictwo Poznańskie.

Filozofia antyczna wobec problemu interpretacji. Rozwój alegorezy od przedsokratyków do Arystotelesa

The present work examines the beginnings of ancient hermeneutics. More specifically, it discusses the connection between the rise of the practice of allegoresis, on the one hand, and the emergence of the first theory of figurative language, on the other. Thus, this book investigates the specific historical and cultural circumstances that enabled the ancient Greeks not only to discover the possibility of allegorical interpretation, but also to treat figurative language as a philosophical problem. By posing difficulties in understanding the enigmatic sense of various esoteric doctrines, poems, oracles and riddles, figurative language created the context for theoretical reflection on the meaning of these “messages”. Hence, ancient interpreters began to ponder over the nature and functions of figurative (“enigmatic”) language as well as over the techniques of its proper use and interpretation. Although the practice of allegorical interpretation was closely linked to the development of the whole of ancient philosophy, the present work covers only the period from the 6th to the 4th century B.C. It concentrates, then, on the philosophical and cultural consequences of allegoresis in the classical age. The main thesis advocated here has it that the ancient Greeks were in-clined to regard allegory as a cognitive problem rather than merely as a stylistic or a literary one. When searching for the hidden meanings of various esoteric doc-trines, poems, oracles and riddles, ancient interpreters of these “messages” assumed allegory to be the only tool suitable for articulating certain matters. In other words, it was their belief that the use of figurative language resulted from the necessity of expressing things that were otherwise inexpressible. The present work has been organized in the following manner. The first part contains historical and philological discussions that provide the point of departure for more philosophical considerations. This part consists of two introductory chapters. Chapter one situates the practice of allegorical interpretation at the borderline of two different traditions: the rhetorical-grammatical and the hermeneutical. In order to clearly differentiate between the two, chapter one distinguishes between allegory and allegoresis, on the one hand, and allegoresis and exegesis, on the other. While pointing to the conventionality (and even arbitrariness) of such distinctions, the chapter argues, nevertheless, for their heuristic usefulness. The remaining part of chapter one focuses on a historical and philological reconstruction of the most important conceptual tools of ancient hermeneutics. Discussing the semantics of such terms as allēgoría, hypónoia, ainigma and symbolon proves important for at least two crucial reasons. Firstly, it reveals the mutual affinity between allegoresis and divination, i.e., practices that are inherently connected with the need to discover the latent meaning of the “message” in question (whether poem or oracle). Secondly, these philological analyses bring to light the specificity of the ancient understanding of such concepts as allegory or symbol. It goes without saying that antiquity employed these terms in a manner quite disparate from modernity. Chapter one concludes with a discussion of ancient views on the cognitive value of figurative (“enigmatic”) language. Chapter two focuses on the role that allegoresis played in the process of transforming mythos into logos. It is suggested here that it was the practice of allegorical interpretation that made it possible to preserve the traditional myths as an important point of reference for the whole of ancient philosophy. Thus, chapter two argues that the existence of a clear opposition between mythos into logos in Preplatonic philosophy is highly questionable in light of the indisputable fact that the Presocratics, Sophists and Cynics were profoundly convinced about the cognitive value of mythos (this conviction was also shared by Plato and Aristotle, but their attitude towards myth was more complex). Consequently, chapter two argues that in Preplatonic philosophy, myth played a function analogous to the concepts discussed in chapter one (i.e., hidden meanings, enigmas and symbols), for in all these cases, ancient interpreters found tools for conveying issues that were otherwise difficult to convey. Chapter two concludes with a classification of various types of allegoresis. Whilst chapters one and two serve as a historical and philological introduction, the second part of this book concentrates on the close relationship between the development of allegoresis, on the one hand, and the flowering of philosophy, on the other. Thus, chapter three discusses the crucial role that allegorical interpretation came to play in Preplatonic philosophy, chapter four deals with Plato’s highly complex and ambivalent attitude to allegoresis, and chapter five has been devoted to Aristotle’s original approach to the practice of allegorical interpretation. It is evident that allegoresis was of paramount importance for the ancient thinkers, irrespective of whether they would value it positively (Preplatonic philosophers and Aristotle) or negatively (Plato). Beginning with the 6th century B.C., the ancient practice of allegorical interpretation is motivated by two distinct interests. On the one hand, the practice of allegorical interpretation reflects the more or less “conservative” attachment to the authority of the poet (whether Homer, Hesiod or Orpheus). The purpose of this apologetic allegoresis is to exonerate poetry from the charges leveled at it by the first philosophers and, though to a lesser degree, historians. Generally, these allegorists seek to save the traditional paideia that builds on the works of the poets. On the other hand, the practice of allegorical interpretation reflects also the more or less “progressive” desire to make original use of the authority of the poet (whether Homer, Hesiod or Orpheus) so as to promote a given philosophical doctrine. The objective of this instrumental allegoresis is to exculpate philosophy from the accusations brought against it by the more conservative circles. Needless to say, these allegorists significantly contribute to the process of the gradual replacing of the mythical view of the world with its more philosophical explanation. The present book suggests that it is the philosophy of Aristotle that should be regarded as a sort of acme in the development of ancient hermeneutics. The reasons for this are twofold. On the one hand, the Stagirite positively values the practice of allegoresis, rehabilitating, thus, the tradition of Preplatonic philosophy against Plato. And, on the other hand, Aristotle initiates the theoretical reflection on figurative (“enigmatic”) language. Hence, in Aristotle we encounter not only the practice of allegoresis, but also the theory of allegory (although the philosopher does not use the term allēgoría). With the situation being as it is, the significance of Aristotle’s work cannot be overestimated. First of all, the Stagirite introduces the concept of metaphor into the then philosophical considerations. From that moment onwards, the phenomenon of figurative language becomes an important philosophical issue. After Aristo-tle, the preponderance of thinkers would feel obliged to specify the rules for the appropriate use of figurative language and the techniques of its correct interpretation. Furthermore, Aristotle ascribes to metaphor (and to various other “excellent” sayings) the function of increasing and enhancing our knowledge. Thus, according to the Stagirite, figurative language is not only an ornamental device, but it can also have a significant explanatory power. Finally, Aristotle observes that figurative expressions cause words to become ambiguous. In this context, the philosopher notices that ambiguity can enrich the language of a poet, but it can also hinder a dialectical discussion. Accordingly, Aristotle is inclined to value polysemy either positively or negatively. Importantly, however, the Stagirite is perfectly aware of the fact that in natural languages ambiguity is unavoidable. This is why Aristotle initiates a syste-matic reflection on the phenomenon of ambiguity and distinguishes its various kinds. In Aristotle, ambiguity is, then, both a problem that needs to be identified and a tool that can help in elucidating intricate philosophical issues. This unique approach to ambiguity and figurative (“enigmatic”) language enabled Aristotle to formulate invaluable intuitions that still await appropriate recognition.

Idiom processing in aphasic patients

The aim of the present paper is to provide insight into the issue of idiom comprehension in pa- tients who are in the process of recovery from the syndrome of aphasia. Research in figurative language comprehension has seen a robust development in the recent decades. However, it has not been until quite recently that psycholinguists began to delve into the aspect of metaphorical language comprehension in brain damaged populations. It was observed that even though the ability to produce and understand language is recovered in the majority of patients with head trauma, the impairment of some aspects of comprehension may protract. The understanding of idioms, metaphors, similes and proverbs, due to their specific, non-literal character, has been evi- denced to pose a serious problem to aphasic patients, as they fail to decipher the figurative mean- ing of the utterance, and, instead, tend to process the message literally (Papagno et al. 2004). In the present study, three patients who suffered from aphasic disorder were tested for com- prehension of idioms by means of two multiple choice tasks. The obtained results corroborated the hypothesis that patients who are in the process of recovery from aphasia encounter various pitfalls in the comprehension of idiomatic language. Predominantly, they exhibit an inclination to choose the erroneous, literal paraphrases of the presented idioms over their correct, idiomatic counterparts. The present paper aims at accounting for the reasons underlying such a tendency.

Przestrzenne formy upamiętniania Zagłady

This book is a synthesizing reflection on the Holocaust commemoration, in which space becomes a starting point for discussion. The author understands space primarily as an amalgam of physical and social components, where various commemorative processes may occur. The first part of the book draws attention to the material aspect of space, which determines its character and function. Material culture has been a long ignored and depreciated dimension of human culture in the humanities and social sciences, because it was perceived as passive and fully controlled by human will, and therefore insignificant in the course of social and historical processes. An example of the Nazi system perfectly illustrates how important were the restrictions and prohibitions on the usage of mundane objects, and in general, the whole material culture in relation to macro and micro space management — the state, cities, neighborhoods and houses, but also parks and swimming pools, factories and offices or shops and theaters. The importance of things and space was also clearly visible in exploitative policies present in overcrowded ghettos and concentration and death camps. For this very reason, when we study spatial forms of Holocaust commemoration, it should be acknowledged that the first traces, proofs and mementoes of the murdered were their things. The first "monuments" showing the enormity of the destruction are thus primarily gigantic piles of objects — shoes, glasses, toys, clothes, suitcases, toothbrushes, etc., which together with the extensive camps’ space try to recall the scale of a crime impossible to understand or imagine. The first chapter shows the importance of introducing the material dimension in thinking about space and commemoration, and it ends with a question about one of the key concepts for the book, a monument, which can be understood as both object (singular or plural) and architecture (sculptures, buildings, highways). However, the term monument tends to be used rather in a later and traditional sense, as an architectural, figurative form commemorating the heroic deeds, carved in stone or cast in bronze. Therefore, the next chapter reconstructs this narrower line of thinking, together with a discussion about what form a monument commemorating a subject as delicate and sensitive as the Holocaust should take on. This leads to an idea of the counter-monument, the concept which was supposed to be the answer to the mentioned representational dilemma on the one hand, and which would disassociate it from the Nazi’s traditional monuments on the other hand. This chapter clarifies the counter-monument definition and explains the misunderstandings and confusions generated on the basis of this concept by following the dynamics of the new commemorative form and by investigating monuments from the ‘80s and ‘90s erected in Germany. In the next chapter, I examine various forms of the Holocaust commemoration in Berlin, a city famous for its bold, monumental, and even controversial projects. We find among them the entire spectrum of memorials – big, monumental, and abstract forms, like Peter Eisenman’s Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe or Daniel Liebeskind’s Jewish Museum Berlin; flat, invisible, and employing the idea of emptiness, like Christian Boltanski’s Missing House or Micha Ullman’s Book Burning Memorial; the dispersed and decentralized, like Renata Stih and Frieder Schnock’s Memory Places or Gunter Demnig’s Stumbling Blocks. I enrich descriptions of the monuments by signaling at this point their second, extended life, which manifests itself in the alternative modes of (mis)use, consisting of various social activities or artistic performances. The formal wealth of the outlined projects creates a wide panorama of possible solutions to the Holocaust commemoration problems. However, the discussions accompanying the building of monuments and their "future life" after realization emphasize the importance of the social component that permeates the biography of the monument, and therefore significantly influences its foreseen design. The book also addresses the relationship of space, place and memory in a specific situation, when commemoration is performed secretly or remains as unrealized potential. Although place is the most common space associated with memory, today the nature of this relationship changes, and is what indicates popularity and employment of such terms as Marc Augé’s non-places or Pierre Nora’s site of memory. I include and develop these concepts about space and memory in my reflections to describe qualitatively different phenomena occurring in Central and Eastern European countries. These are unsettling places in rural areas like glades or parking lots, markets and playgrounds in urban settings. I link them to the post-war time and modernization processes and call them sites of non-memory and non-sites of memory. Another part of the book deals with a completely different form of commemoration called Mystery of memory. Grodzka Gate - NN Theatre in Lublin initiated it in 2000 and as a form it situates itself closer to the art of theater than architecture. Real spaces and places of everyday interactions become a stage for these performances, such as the “Jewish town” in Lublin or the Majdanek concentration camp. The minimalist scenography modifies space and reveals its previously unseen dimensions, while the actors — residents and people especially related to places like survivors and Righteous Among the Nations — are involved in the course of the show thanks to various rituals and symbolic gestures. The performance should be distinguished from social actions, because it incorporates tools known from religious rituals and art, which together saturate the mystery of memory with an aura of uniqueness. The last discussed commemoration mode takes the form of exposition space. I examine an exhibition concerning the fate of the incarcerated children presented in one of the barracks of the Majdanek State Museum in Lublin. The Primer – Children in Majdanek Camp is unique for several reasons. First, because even though it is exhibited in the camp barrack, it uses a completely different filter to tell the story of the camp in comparison to the exhibitions in the rest of the barracks. For this reason, one experiences immersing oneself in all subsequent levels of space and narrative accompanying them – at first, in a general narrative about the camp, and later in a specifically arranged space marked by children’s experiences, their language and thinking, and hence formed in a way more accessible for younger visitors. Second, the exhibition resigns from didacticism and distancing descriptions, and takes an advantage of eyewitnesses and survivors’ testimonies instead. Third, the exhibition space evokes an aura of strangeness similar to a fairy tale or a dream. It is accomplished thanks to the arrangement of various, usually highly symbolic material objects, and by favoring the fragrance and phonic sensations, movement, while belittling visual stimulations. The exhibition creates an impression of a place open to thinking and experiencing, and functions as an asylum, a radically different form to its camp surrounding characterized by a more overwhelming and austere space.