Clarity,
Office 17622,
PO Box 6945,
London.
W1A 6US
United Kingdom
Phone/ Voicemail:
+44 (0)20 3287 3053 (UK)
+1 (561) 459-4758 (US).
C
citizenkoine
Guest
I wondered if this weren't mislisted.
Sitemap and search
The yi as a visual metaphor
I Ching Community Discussion Forum: Friends' Area: The yi as a visual metaphor
By Citizenkoine (Citizenkoine) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 09:50 am:
I've been working on a 'transliteration' of the I Ching, into a sort of visual-graphic language.
On a basic level, I don't think the Yi could exist outside of a fundamental set of visual symbols. The 'texts' all interpret the visual material, which is as barely suggestive (representational) as it is completely unlimited... or, panoramic.
Is the Yi (in its visual OR its textual symbolism) conducive to poetry? A poetry unique to the inherent structure of the Yi? Is rhyme a characteristic of the Yi? What makes the Yi 'oracular', its language, or its 'synchronistic' interpretation through the use of chance operation? Cracks in dragon-bones give such a different, visual, visceral, physiological trace-effect than fist-fulls of wands or ratios of coins.
I think here is finally a forum where I can muse on these things out-loud and feel encouraged. I do. People here are wonderful. Thank you for staying still long enough to 'suddenly show-up'. I appreciate the focus.
By Candid (Candid) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 10:56 am:
Greetings, Citizenkoine.
I imagine Chris will be addressing some of your questions, as they seem right up his alley.
I agree that poetry comes primarily from yin, but with the original creative spark from yang. Visuals like 'cracks in dragon bones' can be powerful and evoking metaphors. Since Yi speaks in metaphoric language, I think you're onto the spirit of the oracle. That could make an interesting spring-board for your transliteration.
C
By Chrislofting (Chrislofting) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 01:34 pm:
Hi CK,
you wrote:
>
> I've been working on a 'transliteration' of the I Ching,
> into a sort of visual-graphic language.
>
> On a basic level, I don't think the Yi could exist outside
> of a fundamental set of visual symbols.
It does. it exists as a set of qualities derived at the species level where those qualities are what allows us to communicate using ANY sense with context determining the 'better' sense.
The I Ching is a specialisation for a generalisation, the set of qualities. That set is combined with a unique context and from that association comes a language to describe that context. IOW all specialisations generate their own language but that language is rooted in ONE set of universal qualities encoded at the unconscious level of our species being.
Specialisations include the individual in that, given the chance, we would create our own labels for things. That gets confusing is social interactions so we educate individuals. That said, each generation does develop a degree of their own language!
> The 'texts' all
> interpret the visual material, which is as barely suggestive
> (representational) as it is completely unlimited... or,
> panoramic.
>
The 'traditional' texts have that bias but it is limiting - 3-dimensional. Our emotions allow us to work in a lot higher dimensions - each hexagram with changing lines in fact reflects a dodecagram (2^12) and so 12 dimensions packed into one form. That form can only be immediately FELT, intuited. Any visual form will not be whole, only part. Summing of 'like' visual forms can lead to an intuition but it is limited by only being visual ;-) Our brain strongly adapted to vision as it developed but has gone beyond that.
The 'traditional' texts are what I call the 10BC perspective. To move from 10BC to 21AD means to include all of the research that has gone on into the properties and methods of meaning derivation and in particular the use of analogy and metaphor be they visual, auditory, tactile etc.
(in passing note that audition is more precise than vision in that it uses superpositions - chords. Our ears can pick out each element in that chord; our eyes only see visual superpositions as hues and so lacks the differentiating skills ;-))
Full spectrum comprehension means going beyond vision ;-) Now, if you want to START with considering vision, sure, go ahead, but the issue is that since the initial conditions can set contexts so starting visually forces a bias in perspectives that could be hard to break. If you start with what is common in ALL of the senses then you have an better chance in easy translation of one experience in sense to another/others ;-)
It is like the difference between tertiary and secondary educations - at the level of secondary you learn 'procedures', expressions etc, such that the procedure is the 'way to do things', the 'way to express things'. At the tertiary level you go deeper into fundamentals behind all expressions and so all procedures. THAT level gives you the ability to interrupt a procedure and do something differently when needed. By understanding the COMMON ground for ALL sensory communications so you become more flexible in dealing with ANY context and ANY sense ;-)
Chris.
By Lenardthefast (Lenardthefast) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 07:09 pm:
Welcome, CK
You and your muse should feel free to wade right in, the water is warm and enervating here. ...although, just like any self-respecting teapot, occasionally a tempest blows through.
Great post, Chris.
Namaste,
Leonard
By Citizenkoine (Citizenkoine) on Sunday, February 15, 2004 - 09:02 am:
What a gift! My cavity runneth vexity. Thanks and greetings this morvening. You make a model triumvirate: Chris, anticipated, and then his apologist. LOL! Take it as a hot poker to the scapula. It is no jest to say that I feel warmly welcomed.
"I agree that poetry comes primarily from yin, but with the original creative spark from yang."
This drives me toward another model for me, Yeats' book, 'A Vision'. By the particular diagram for that symbol (and what a symbol), Yeats describes the 'pure primary' and the 'pure antithetical' states as nodes of an antinomy, which cannot be inhabited/experienced directly, as such, but only in relation to each other, ratio(nally). Evidently, this describes somewhat the issue of relative context that Chris uses in his explanation. My point, though, is that yin and yang both rhyme, and do not. The Dan Tien is a sphere, of which we can only ever see a hemisphere(again, anticipated by Chris); that says nothing of what it is like to exspherience that from an inspherent perspective. Yin and Yang in complete balance are numb. Alone, they cease to exist. They are describable in their relative nuances, though, visually, symbolically, too. 100%, no. 50/50, not really. 1/99, yes. 49/51, yes. Rationally, somewhat. Honestly, I'm not sure what you mean by Yin, or Yang.
" 'On a basic level, I don't think the Yi could exist outside
> of a fundamental set of visual symbols.'
It does. it exists as a set of qualities derived at the species level where those qualities are what allows us to communicate using ANY sense with context determining the 'better' sense.
The I Ching is a specialisation for a generalisation, the set of qualities. That set is combined with a unique context and from that association comes a language to describe that context. IOW all specialisations generate their own language but that language is rooted in ONE set of universal qualities encoded at the unconscious level of our species being."
Chris, I really appreciate your particular brand of attention. I feel educated, addressed, illuminated by it. I also appreciate the rather compressed nature of this particular response; it did not suffer for its economy. Artfully done. Given your insight, I may reiterate my statement, differently. I think it is the specialized context of visual symbols constituted by the I Ching which differentiates it as a specialized context of/w/in 'the set of qualities'.
I specifically want to use visual metaphor - non-representational, chromatic/spatial/geometric formation and mark-making - as derived from the specialized context of the I Ching and as a bridge, out/in towards 'the set of qualities'.
I am trained as an artist. I prefer the limitations of three dimensions, for the time-being. There is more than one way to derive a dodecagram (or represent one, for that matter), and then, how many ways to derive/represent a sexagisimo-quartogram? A tercentenni-octagisimo-quartogram? That is what I am driven to explore, using the specialized context of a visual/tactile GRAMmar. Music and writing - talking, for that matter - are not my particular specialties, though I love and appreciate them in the craft of others'.
"(in passing note that audition is more precise than vision in that it uses superpositions - chords. Our ears can pick out each element in that chord; our eyes only see visual superpositions as hues and so lacks the differentiating skills ;-)) "
superpositions are simply coincident juxtapositions. Juxtapositions do not even have to occupy the same time-frame, much less coincide in either space or time. Our eyes differentiate/interpret visual juxtapositions beyond hue, to great and varied effect. Yantras and mandalas are the class to which I would add nascently the hexagrams. Chris, I wonder what you have to say about 'mathesis', generally?
I think, then, that I am admitting my visual bias - as a starting point. Given that my approach is in the practice of a craft, my apotheosis will probably be within the context of that practice. But I thank you, Chris, for differentiating comprehension from vision so well. Maybe you can see why I prefer the term, 'transliteration', between senses/idioms.
I do hate to stop, but; -and the furious, Leonard? A pulse in the temples, indeed!
-koine
Sitemap and search
The yi as a visual metaphor
I Ching Community Discussion Forum: Friends' Area: The yi as a visual metaphor
By Citizenkoine (Citizenkoine) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 09:50 am:
I've been working on a 'transliteration' of the I Ching, into a sort of visual-graphic language.
On a basic level, I don't think the Yi could exist outside of a fundamental set of visual symbols. The 'texts' all interpret the visual material, which is as barely suggestive (representational) as it is completely unlimited... or, panoramic.
Is the Yi (in its visual OR its textual symbolism) conducive to poetry? A poetry unique to the inherent structure of the Yi? Is rhyme a characteristic of the Yi? What makes the Yi 'oracular', its language, or its 'synchronistic' interpretation through the use of chance operation? Cracks in dragon-bones give such a different, visual, visceral, physiological trace-effect than fist-fulls of wands or ratios of coins.
I think here is finally a forum where I can muse on these things out-loud and feel encouraged. I do. People here are wonderful. Thank you for staying still long enough to 'suddenly show-up'. I appreciate the focus.
By Candid (Candid) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 10:56 am:
Greetings, Citizenkoine.
I imagine Chris will be addressing some of your questions, as they seem right up his alley.
I agree that poetry comes primarily from yin, but with the original creative spark from yang. Visuals like 'cracks in dragon bones' can be powerful and evoking metaphors. Since Yi speaks in metaphoric language, I think you're onto the spirit of the oracle. That could make an interesting spring-board for your transliteration.
C
By Chrislofting (Chrislofting) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 01:34 pm:
Hi CK,
you wrote:
>
> I've been working on a 'transliteration' of the I Ching,
> into a sort of visual-graphic language.
>
> On a basic level, I don't think the Yi could exist outside
> of a fundamental set of visual symbols.
It does. it exists as a set of qualities derived at the species level where those qualities are what allows us to communicate using ANY sense with context determining the 'better' sense.
The I Ching is a specialisation for a generalisation, the set of qualities. That set is combined with a unique context and from that association comes a language to describe that context. IOW all specialisations generate their own language but that language is rooted in ONE set of universal qualities encoded at the unconscious level of our species being.
Specialisations include the individual in that, given the chance, we would create our own labels for things. That gets confusing is social interactions so we educate individuals. That said, each generation does develop a degree of their own language!
> The 'texts' all
> interpret the visual material, which is as barely suggestive
> (representational) as it is completely unlimited... or,
> panoramic.
>
The 'traditional' texts have that bias but it is limiting - 3-dimensional. Our emotions allow us to work in a lot higher dimensions - each hexagram with changing lines in fact reflects a dodecagram (2^12) and so 12 dimensions packed into one form. That form can only be immediately FELT, intuited. Any visual form will not be whole, only part. Summing of 'like' visual forms can lead to an intuition but it is limited by only being visual ;-) Our brain strongly adapted to vision as it developed but has gone beyond that.
The 'traditional' texts are what I call the 10BC perspective. To move from 10BC to 21AD means to include all of the research that has gone on into the properties and methods of meaning derivation and in particular the use of analogy and metaphor be they visual, auditory, tactile etc.
(in passing note that audition is more precise than vision in that it uses superpositions - chords. Our ears can pick out each element in that chord; our eyes only see visual superpositions as hues and so lacks the differentiating skills ;-))
Full spectrum comprehension means going beyond vision ;-) Now, if you want to START with considering vision, sure, go ahead, but the issue is that since the initial conditions can set contexts so starting visually forces a bias in perspectives that could be hard to break. If you start with what is common in ALL of the senses then you have an better chance in easy translation of one experience in sense to another/others ;-)
It is like the difference between tertiary and secondary educations - at the level of secondary you learn 'procedures', expressions etc, such that the procedure is the 'way to do things', the 'way to express things'. At the tertiary level you go deeper into fundamentals behind all expressions and so all procedures. THAT level gives you the ability to interrupt a procedure and do something differently when needed. By understanding the COMMON ground for ALL sensory communications so you become more flexible in dealing with ANY context and ANY sense ;-)
Chris.
By Lenardthefast (Lenardthefast) on Saturday, February 14, 2004 - 07:09 pm:
Welcome, CK
You and your muse should feel free to wade right in, the water is warm and enervating here. ...although, just like any self-respecting teapot, occasionally a tempest blows through.
Great post, Chris.
Namaste,
Leonard
By Citizenkoine (Citizenkoine) on Sunday, February 15, 2004 - 09:02 am:
What a gift! My cavity runneth vexity. Thanks and greetings this morvening. You make a model triumvirate: Chris, anticipated, and then his apologist. LOL! Take it as a hot poker to the scapula. It is no jest to say that I feel warmly welcomed.
"I agree that poetry comes primarily from yin, but with the original creative spark from yang."
This drives me toward another model for me, Yeats' book, 'A Vision'. By the particular diagram for that symbol (and what a symbol), Yeats describes the 'pure primary' and the 'pure antithetical' states as nodes of an antinomy, which cannot be inhabited/experienced directly, as such, but only in relation to each other, ratio(nally). Evidently, this describes somewhat the issue of relative context that Chris uses in his explanation. My point, though, is that yin and yang both rhyme, and do not. The Dan Tien is a sphere, of which we can only ever see a hemisphere(again, anticipated by Chris); that says nothing of what it is like to exspherience that from an inspherent perspective. Yin and Yang in complete balance are numb. Alone, they cease to exist. They are describable in their relative nuances, though, visually, symbolically, too. 100%, no. 50/50, not really. 1/99, yes. 49/51, yes. Rationally, somewhat. Honestly, I'm not sure what you mean by Yin, or Yang.
" 'On a basic level, I don't think the Yi could exist outside
> of a fundamental set of visual symbols.'
It does. it exists as a set of qualities derived at the species level where those qualities are what allows us to communicate using ANY sense with context determining the 'better' sense.
The I Ching is a specialisation for a generalisation, the set of qualities. That set is combined with a unique context and from that association comes a language to describe that context. IOW all specialisations generate their own language but that language is rooted in ONE set of universal qualities encoded at the unconscious level of our species being."
Chris, I really appreciate your particular brand of attention. I feel educated, addressed, illuminated by it. I also appreciate the rather compressed nature of this particular response; it did not suffer for its economy. Artfully done. Given your insight, I may reiterate my statement, differently. I think it is the specialized context of visual symbols constituted by the I Ching which differentiates it as a specialized context of/w/in 'the set of qualities'.
I specifically want to use visual metaphor - non-representational, chromatic/spatial/geometric formation and mark-making - as derived from the specialized context of the I Ching and as a bridge, out/in towards 'the set of qualities'.
I am trained as an artist. I prefer the limitations of three dimensions, for the time-being. There is more than one way to derive a dodecagram (or represent one, for that matter), and then, how many ways to derive/represent a sexagisimo-quartogram? A tercentenni-octagisimo-quartogram? That is what I am driven to explore, using the specialized context of a visual/tactile GRAMmar. Music and writing - talking, for that matter - are not my particular specialties, though I love and appreciate them in the craft of others'.
"(in passing note that audition is more precise than vision in that it uses superpositions - chords. Our ears can pick out each element in that chord; our eyes only see visual superpositions as hues and so lacks the differentiating skills ;-)) "
superpositions are simply coincident juxtapositions. Juxtapositions do not even have to occupy the same time-frame, much less coincide in either space or time. Our eyes differentiate/interpret visual juxtapositions beyond hue, to great and varied effect. Yantras and mandalas are the class to which I would add nascently the hexagrams. Chris, I wonder what you have to say about 'mathesis', generally?
I think, then, that I am admitting my visual bias - as a starting point. Given that my approach is in the practice of a craft, my apotheosis will probably be within the context of that practice. But I thank you, Chris, for differentiating comprehension from vision so well. Maybe you can see why I prefer the term, 'transliteration', between senses/idioms.
I do hate to stop, but; -and the furious, Leonard? A pulse in the temples, indeed!
-koine