We can't see ourselves as others see us but we try, try, try. Don't we always shape our personae in relation to our audiences, even though the professional actors, etc., do it best. What about animals that alter their shapes to some degree to blend into the enviornment or to look larger to a predator or to intimidate prey? We presume they have little sense of self image so how and why do they know enough to alter their appearances? A Darwinian answer suffices, I suppose.
I'm not sure about the analogy of Michael's dichotomy to art, although I can't say it's false. I'm inclined to think just may not be true enough or revealing enough in clarifying what art is. We project our self image in many ways and probably all of them fail in large or small ways to match how we are perceived. But we are always keenly interested in self-deception. If that's also true of art, what do we learn? WC --- On Sun, 1/25/09, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: > From: [email protected] <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: From all appearances > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Date: Sunday, January 25, 2009, 4:00 PM > "... even though he knows > himself better than anyone else". > > I am not sure we know objectively ourselves better then > anyone else, except > some intimate details. But I find thoughts in the post very > insightful. > Boris Shoshensky > > -- Michael Brady <[email protected]> wrote: > I am intrigued with the dichotomy of appearances--the > dichotomy of > what is perceived and what is the substance. > > We are reminded that the words are not the ideas, and the > ideas > themselves do not exist outside our transient, > in-the-moment > interpreting of sensory data. We are reminded that the war > horse or > nude is a bunch of paint daubs on canvas. That the actor is > not the > role. (Our modern word "persona" is derived from > the Etruscan word for > "mask.") > > The most intriguing inversion of this dichotomy is: > > We recognize the other person by his or her appearance, > posture and > gait, sound of the voice and intonation and gestures--that > is, but > many outward aspects. And we infer the inner person by what > the person > says and does, what he or she has said and done in the > past, by tell- > tale cultural cliues, like winks and nods, frowns, smiles, > animated > movements. By all of these signs, we develop a paradigm > that we > believe "describes" the other person's > "inner self." All of this from > outside the person. > > But the one person we do know intimately, whose motivations > we > understand, whose reactions and associative thinking and > likes and > dislikes we know as intimately as the "Biblical" > meaning of that word > conveys ... is the same person whose appearances we know > least well. > Namely, ourselves. > > Typically, one is surprised by how he appears in a > photograph or film > and by how he sounds on tape. And, perhaps, he thinks less > of himself > because of the sound of his voice or his shape or movements > ... > without realizing that that is exactly *how his friends > know him*. In > other words, he might misinterpret his own appearances, > thinking that > he is less attractive because of these qualities, even > though he knows > himself better than anyone else. > > Furthermore, individuals who can control their appearances > the best > are those skilled in the various arts of public > appearance--dancers, > actors, models, speakers, and the like. They have learned > how to > control the variables of their appearance, the sound of the > voice, > posture, walk, hand gestures, clothing, choice of words, > hair style > and skin surface. They have mastered, in other words, the > ability to > manipulate superficial qualities in order to enhance or > express what > can pass for essential qualities. > > Isn't this like art: the artist creates some kind of > manifestation by > manipulating discrete independent aspects of a > presentation, so that > some form of "whole" is produced that conveys a > certain impression, > whereas events "in the real world" unfold as they > do without this kind > of pretense? (Now, the event may be a play or painting, > which itself > does involve a pretense of some kind, but our experience of > it "in the > real world" typically does not: we go to the theater > or gallery and > see it, we don't pretend to see it.) > > > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | > Michael Brady > [email protected] > > ____________________________________________________________ > Make sure your shower gets you clean. Click now for a high > quality shower > filter! > http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2241/fc/PnY6rx8sK32U3uZGdB9XXv7ZhQ7MAM > UOajtyZta2DbNW3KAS0k9W8/
