Abstract
How should one describe the irreducible relationships in photopoetry observed in intermedial literary photobooks? According to most authors, in literary photobooks, the verbal sign system is linked to the photographic image as a bidirectional interaction, creating a coupled system that can be seen as a new sign system. Mutually modulatory influences link verbal text and photography. But the nature of such influences needs to be explained in detail and with accuracy. What kind of relation are we dealing with? Many authors have tried to explain this phenomenon through several epistemic metaphors. The problem is that these metaphors are rarely subjected to any general theory of meaning. Surprisingly, this is not even mentioned as a problem. In this article, we propose a general semiotic model to describe the irreducible photography-poetry relation, derived from C. S. Peirce’s pragmatic theory of signs, and we also present some preliminary results of the analysis of Quarenta Clics em Curitiba, a photobook by Paulo Leminski and Jack Pires. Our purpose here is to introduce and explore this model to describe the photography-poetry relationship in coupled systems. This relationship is decomposed, in the functional roles occupied by poems and photographs, into a sign-object-interpretant relation. The triadic irreducibility that characterizes semiosis (à la Peirce) is the main property applied to photograph-poetry coupling in Quarenta Clics em Curitiba.
Acknowledgments
Ana Fernandes thanks the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) for the support received. We thank Leticia Vitral and Lílian Moreira for their commentary and criticism.
References
Atã, Pedro & João Queiroz. 2016. Habit in semiosis: Two different perspectives based on hierarchical multi-level system modeling and niche construction theory. In Donna West & Myrdene Anderson (eds.), Consensus on Peirce’s concept of habit: Before and beyond consciousness, 109–119. Cham: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-45920-2_7Search in Google Scholar
Atã, Pedro & João Queiroz. 2019a. Emergent sign-action: Classical ballet as a self-organized and temporally distributed semiotic process. European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy 9(2). 1–19. https://doi.org/10.4000/ejpap.1652.Search in Google Scholar
Atã, Pedro & João Queiroz. 2019b. Semiosis is cognitive niche construction. Semiotica 228(1/4). 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1515/sem-2018-0092.Search in Google Scholar
Atkin, Albert. 2016. Peirce. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315696409Search in Google Scholar
Barthes, Roland. 2003. La préparation du roman. Cours et séminaire au Collège de France (1978–1979 et 1979–1980). Paris: Seuil/IMEC.10.4000/leportique.586Search in Google Scholar
Barthes, Roland. 1964. Rhétorique de l’image. Communications 4. 40–51. https://doi.org/10.3406/comm.1964.1027.Search in Google Scholar
Brunning, Jacqueline. 1997. Genuine triads and teridentity. In Houser Nathan, Don Roberts & Evra James (eds.), Studies in the logic of Charles Sanders Peirce, 252–270. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Burch, Robert W. 1997. Peirce’s reduction thesis. In Houser Nathan, Don Roberts & Evra James (eds.), Studies in the logic of Charles S. Peirce, 234–251. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Clüver, Claus. 1997. Estudos interartes: Conceitos, termos e objetivos [lnterarts studies: Concepts, terms, objectives]. Literatura e Sociedade 2(2). 37–55. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2237-1184.v0i2p37-55.Search in Google Scholar
Clüver, Claus. 2006 [2001]. Inter textus /inter artes/ inter media. Aletria 14(1). 11–41. https://doi.org/10.17851/2317-2096.14.0.10-41.Search in Google Scholar
Clüver, Claus. 2007. Intermediality and interarts studies. In Jens Arvidson, Mikael Askander, Jørgen Bruhn & Heidrun Führer (eds.), Changing borders: Contemporary positions in intermediality, vol. 1, 19–37. Lund: Intermedia Studies Press.Search in Google Scholar
De Tienne, André. 2003. Learning qua semiosis. Semiotics, Evolution, Energy, and Development Journal 3. 37–53.Search in Google Scholar
De Waal, Cornelis. 2013. Peirce: A guide for the perplexed. London: Bloomsbury.Search in Google Scholar
Elleström, Lars. 2010. The modalities of media: A model for understanding intermedial relations. In Lars Elleström (ed.), Media borders, multimodality and intermediality, 11–48. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230275201_2Search in Google Scholar
Farias, Priscila & João Queiroz. 2006. Images, diagrams, and metaphors: Hypoicons in the context of Peirce’s sixty-six fold classification of signs. Semiotica 162(1/4). 287–308. https://doi.org/10.1515/sem.2006.081.Search in Google Scholar
Fernandes, Ana Luiza & João Queiroz. 2017. Quarenta anos do Quarenta Clics em Curitiba, de Leminski e Pires. Revista Estudos de Literatura Brasileira Contemporânea 51. 206–220. https://doi.org/10.1590/2316-40185110.Search in Google Scholar
Fisch, Max. 1986. Peirce, semeiotic, and pragmatism. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Floch, Jean-Marie. 1981. Sémiotique plastique et langage publicitaire: Analyse d’une annonce de la campagne de lancement de la cigarette. Paris: Groupe de recherches sémio-linguistiques.Search in Google Scholar
Floch, Jean-Marie. 1990. Sémiotique, marketing, et communication. Paris: PUF.Search in Google Scholar
Fontanari, Rodrigo. 2011. Marshall Mcluhan e Roland Barthes diante da fotografia e do haicai [Marshall Mcluhan & Roland Barthes facing photography and haiku]. Entretextos 11(2). 28–45.Search in Google Scholar
Helbig, Jens. 1998. Intermedialität: Theorie und Praxis eines interdisziplinären Forschungsgebiets [Intermediality: Theory and practice of an area of interdisciplinary studies]. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.Search in Google Scholar
Hookway, Christopher. 2002. Truth rationality, and pragmatism: Themes from Peirce. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/0199256586.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Houser, Nathan. 1997. Introduction: Peirce as a logician. In Houser Nathan, Don Roberts & Evra James (eds.), Studies in the logic of Charles Sanders Peirce, 1–22. Indiana: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Jappy, Antony. 2014. Iconicity, hypoiconicity. In Mats, Bergman & João, Queiroz (eds.), The commens encyclopedia: The digital encyclopedia of Peirce studies. Helsinki: Commens. http://www.commens.org/encyclopedia/article/jappy-antony-iconicity-hypoiconicity (accessed 4 January 2022).Search in Google Scholar
Johansen, Jørgen Dines. 1993. Dialogic semiosis. Indiana: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Joly, Martine. 1994. Introduction à l’analyse de l’image. Paris: Nathan.Search in Google Scholar
Leminski, Paulo. 2012a. Ensaios e anseios crípticos [Cryptic essays]. São Paulo: Editora Unicamp.Search in Google Scholar
Leminski, Paulo. 2012b. Toda poesia [All poetry]. São Paulo: Cia das Letras.Search in Google Scholar
Leminski, Paulo & Jack Pires. 1990 [1976]. Quarenta clics em Curitiba [Forty clicks in Curitiba]. Curitiba: Editora Etecetera.Search in Google Scholar
Merrell, Floyd. 1997. Peirce, signs, and meaning. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.10.3138/9781442678330Search in Google Scholar
Müller, Jurgen. 2012. Intermidialidade revisitada: Algumas reflexões sobre os princípios básicos desse conceito. In Thaïs Flores Nogueira Diniz & André Soares Vieira (eds.), Intermidialidade e estudos interartes: Desafios da arte contemporânea, 75–97. Belo Horizonte: Rona Editora.Search in Google Scholar
Navas, Adolfo Montejo. 2017. Fotografia § poesia: Afinidades eletivas [Photography § poetry]. São Paulo: Ubu Editora.Search in Google Scholar
Parker, Kelly. 1998. The continuity of Peirce’s thought. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Peninou, Georges. 1972. Intelligence de la publicité: Étude sémiotique. Paris: Robert Laffont.Search in Google Scholar
Peninou, Georges. 1976. Semiótica de la publicidad. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1931–1966. The collected papers of Charles S. Peirce, 8 vols., Charles Hartshorne, Paul Weiss & Arthur W. Burks (eds.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [Reference to Peirce’s papers will be designated CP followed by volume and paragraph number.]Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1967. Manuscripts in the Houghton Library of Harvard University, as identified by Richard Robin. In Annotated catalogue of the Papers of Charles S. Peirce. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press. [Reference to Peirce’s manuscripts will be designated MS or L.]Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1998, (1893–1913). Essential Peirce: Selected philosophical writings, 2 vols., Peirce Edition Project (ed.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press. [Reference to vol. 2 of Essential Peirce will be designated EP 2.]Search in Google Scholar
Queiroz, João & Charbel El-Hani. 2006a. Semiosis as an emergent process. Transactions of the Charles S Peirce Society 42(1). 78–116. https://doi.org/10.1353/csp.2006.0013.Search in Google Scholar
Queiroz, João & Charbel El-Hani. 2006b. Towards a multi-level approach to the emergence of meaning in living systems. Acta Biotheoretica 54. 179–206. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10441-006-8177-0.Search in Google Scholar
Ransdell, Joseph. 1983. Peircean semiotics. Unpublished manuscript.Search in Google Scholar
Rajewsky, Irina. 2005. Intermediality, intertextuality and remediation: A literary perspective on intermediality. Intermédialités 6. 43–64. https://doi.org/10.7202/1005505ar.Search in Google Scholar
Rajewsky, Irina. 2010. Border talks: The problematic status of media borders in the current debate about intermediality. In Lars Elleström (ed.), Media borders, multimodality and intermediality, 51–68. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230275201_3Search in Google Scholar
Savan, David. 1987–1988. An introduction to C. S. Peirce’s full system of semiotic. Toronto: Victoria College.Search in Google Scholar
Vaz, Toninho. 2001. Paulo Leminski: O bandido que sabia latim. Rio de Janeiro: Editora Record.Search in Google Scholar
Vitral, Letícia & João Queiroz. 2021. Gestures as diagrams from Peirce’s mature semeiotic. Metodo 9(1). 237–259. https://doi.org/10.19079/metodo.9.1.237.Search in Google Scholar
© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
