This dissertation considers whether photography as a language translates a transient moment into an embodied image. This is considered to be a mimesis of the moment as an aid for memory. By following a dialectic approach I posit a thesis based on the common sense perception of photography which states that photography is an artefactual mimesis aiding memory. After reflecting on Plato’s concept of writing as a pharmakon and Jacques Derrida’s deconstruction theory I establish an antithesis which proclaims that a photograph aids memory but also leads to the illusion of remembering past experiences. The synthesis is then presented which resolves the opposing ideas. This component argues that a photograph is a mimetic device that aids memory by presenting embodied fragmented reflections of time which can be used to create new meanings and memories. The dissertation concludes with a discussion that supports and integrates this argument with visual research. / Art History, Visual Arts and Musicology / M.A. (Visual Arts)

Thesis (MA (Afrikaans and Dutch))—University of Stellenbosch, 2007. / This study investigates the way in which the representation of history and of the "other" coheres with the construction of the identity of the characters in Eilande (2002) by Dan Sleigh and Pelican Bay (2002) by Nelleke Noordervliet. Initially the research contextualises the authors and their novels by means of a short biographical introduction on the two authors and their different oeuvre’s, as well as an outline of the reception history of the two chosen postcolonial novels. The theoretical background which follows, gives a review on postcolonial literature in general and, more specific, in the Netherlands and South Africa respectively. Different perspectives on representation of the history and the representation of the "other" are provided, with specific attention to the relationship between hybridity, syncretism and identity. These theoretical insights form the basis for the analysis of the two novels, where the relationships and differences between these two postcolonial texts are highlighted. The conclusion is that Eilande and Pelican Bay could be seen as, firstly postcolonial, as both novels provide criticism on the colonial order in different ways and, secondly, were published during a period which followed the colonial era. Hybridity is an important term in this study, with reference to the forming of identity of some of the prominent characters. The conclusion is that the term dynamic cultural hybridity could be used in discussions about postcolonial mixed identities. Although both novels use techniques to give a voice to voiceless marginal subjects, shortcomings in their portrayal as fully-fledged characters do, however, exist. Both novels also have as an ultimate objective to prove that it is impossible to know history and the "other" and that no one truth exists. The motif of islands which appears frequently in both novels is related to aspects like identity, exile and alienation. In conclusion it is not only apparent how strongly the different characters in the novels are formed by their socio-historical contexts, but also from the approach of the authors in their contemporary criticism on oppressing systems like the VOC and/or slavery.

This dissertation comprises the first study of the poetry of the Portuguese humanist Diogo de Teive (1513-14 – c. 1569). It examines and presents a scholarly edition of the Epithalamium which Teive composed on the occasion of the marriage of Princess Maria of Portugal to Alessandro Farnese in 1565. It also critically explores the work in which the poem was published, the Epodon libri tres (Lisbon, 1565). Because both this and the Epithalamium bring together different strands of Teive’s literary work, Chapter One analyses the development of his literary career, linking it to the ideological and cultural transformations which took place in Portugal from the 1540s to the 1560s, and the author’s attempt to carve his identity and space in the Portuguese literary scene. Chapter Two explores the concepts of ‘imitatio’ and ‘mimesis’ in the Epodon libri tres, shedding light on specific aspects of the Epithalamium. In the eyes of his readers, Teive emerges as a Catholic Horace. This is achieved by means of formal imitation, ‘aemulatio’, and allusion to Horace, a process whereby Teive introduces significant and ideologically motivated differences representative of the impact of Counter-Reformation upon literary writing. The ‘aemulatio’ of Prudentius’s Peristephanon in book II is to be understood in this light. Part Two engages with Teive’s comments on questions of verbal representation in the Epodon libri tres. Chapter Three analyses the Epithalamium from a generic perspective, arguing that it presents instances of generic enrichment, and that these are an example of the appropriation of occasional poetry for the purpose of authorial self-representation. One of the instances of generic enrichment is the incorporation of a didactic passage indebted to the tradition of the ‘speculum principum’, which is analysed in Chapter Four. Part One interprets the rewriting and appropriation of Plutarch and Erasmus as authorising strategies whereby Teive represents himself as an advisor of kings in the Epodon libri tres. Part Two discusses the author’s political thought and opinions, drawing from an analysis of the Epithalamium. Finally, Chapter Five comprises the study of the transmission of the poem, its metrical analysis, edition, translation, and commentary.

Cette thèse est une recherche pluridisciplinaire sur le concept du pardon interpersonnel. Elle cherche à circonscrire la portée et la dynamique du pardon, entre autres en répondant à la question Pourquoi pardonner ? Jusqu’à récemment on trouvait peu d’écrits sur le pardon. Mais les deux dernières décennies ont vu un foisonnement de travaux de recherche sur le sujet de la part de psychologues éveillés à ses bienfaits thérapeutiques. Parallèlement, des philosophes et des théologiens se sont aussi intéressés à la question et ont commencé à publier leurs réflexions. Deux hypothèses marquent le parcours de notre recherche. La première porte sur la signification de la deuxième partie de l’énoncé biblique en Luc 23, 34 « Père, pardonne-leur car ils ne savent pas ce qu’ils font ». Elle avance que le « motif de l’ignorance » que cette parole affirme a une portée universelle et soutient que l’offenseur est en état d’ignorance inconsciente lorsqu’il fait le mal. Le pardon des offenses serait donc le pardon de cette ignorance inconsciente. La seconde hypothèse conjecture que le pardon interpersonnel s’inscrit dans une dynamique spirituelle même s’il a quitté ses amarres religieuses. Nous avançons que la relation pardon-spiritualité est significative et que sa compréhension peut aider à mieux saisir l’essence d’un pardon devenu séculier et à en permettre l’éclosion. Pour établir la valeur de cette hypothèse, nous devons étudier la dynamique d’une démarche de pardon de même qu’à déterminer le statut actuel de la spiritualité. La thèse se divise en trois parties. La première partie expose la pensée d’auteurs significatifs dans chacune des principales disciplines concernées par le pardon : philosophie, théologie, psychologie et spiritualité. Il y est question d’offense pardonnable ou impardonnable, de pardon conditionnel ou inconditionnel, de corrélats du pardon comme l’oubli, la colère, la culpabilité, le repentir et des résultats d’études empiriques psychothérapeutiques sur le pardon. Cette première partie se termine par une réflexion sur la spiritualité de façon à voir dans quelle mesure le pardon devient une dynamique spirituelle. La deuxième partie est consacrée à l’examen de l’hypothèse concernant le sens et la portée du « car ils ne savent pas ce qu’ils font ». Dans un premier temps on fait appel à l’expertise exégétique pour situer l’authenticité et la portée de ce passage. Nous explorons ensuite la pensée philosophique à travers l’histoire pour comprendre le véritable sens du libre-arbitre et son impact sur la conception de la faute. La remise en cause philosophique du libre-arbitre nous ramènera à la thèse socratique selon laquelle « Nul n’est méchant volontairement ». La théorie mimétique de René Girard vient démontrer que les persécuteurs sont fondamentalement inconscients de ce qu’ils font et la théologienne Lytta Basset identifie le fantasme de la connaissance du bien et du mal comme accroissant cette ignorance qui s’ignore. La troisième partie de la thèse intègre les réflexions et découvertes des deux premières parties, et les situent dans un parcours qui va de l’impardonnable à la guérison, tout en les conceptualisant avec une matrice de verticalité et d’horizontalité qui schématise leurs interactions. Nous découvrons que si « car ils ne savent pas ce qu’ils font » fournit la réponse logique à la question Pourquoi pardonner ?, il existe aussi une deuxième voie qui conduit au pardon, l’amour. L’amour est la clé du pardon basé sur le message évangélique, alors que l’empathie est celle de l’approche psychothérapeutique. Enfin, la comparaison entre le « pardon psychothérapeutique » et le « pardon évangélique » nous fait conclure qu’il y a deux modes d’accès majeurs au pardon : la raison et l’amour. / This thesis is a multidisciplinary approach to the concept of interpersonal forgiveness. Its purpose is to unearth the scope and dynamics of forgiveness, as it seeks to answer the question, Why forgive? Up until recently, there has been a dearth of literature on the subject of forgiveness. Then over the past 20 years, an escalation of psychotherapeutic research on forgiveness started to emerge as psychologists awakened to its healing benefits. Over the same time period, a number of philosophers and theologians also began publishing on the subject. Two hypotheses benchmark the research. The first one concerns the meaning of the second half of the biblical quote, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do,” found in Luke 23:34. This hypothesis claims that the “motive of ignorance” is universal in scope, and purports that the offender is ignorantly unaware of his wrongdoing. Forgiveness of an offense can thus be interpreted as the forgiveness of ignorance. The second hypothesis claims that interpersonal forgiveness can be understood as a spiritual dynamic, but with the loosening of its religious ties. We believe the forgiveness–spirituality relationship to be a significant one, and that a deeper understanding of it will bring us closer to the fundamental nature and gift of forgiveness, thereby facilitating its realization. However, to determine the value of this hypothesis, we must consider both the process of forgiveness, and the contemporary definition of spirituality. The thesis is divided into three parts. The first part depicts authors who discuss forgiveness through the lens of the four academic disciplines concerned with forgiveness: philosophy, theology, psychology, and spirituality. Issues that are covered include what is forgivable and what is not, and conditional versus unconditional forgiveness. Correlates of forgiveness, such as forgetting, anger, repentance, guilt, as well as results of psychotherapeutic empirical studies, are examined. A reflection on the concept of spirituality and how it relates to forgiveness concludes this first part. In the second part, we examine the hypothesis concerning the meaning and scope of the biblical quote “for they know not what they do,” and look at what the exegetic expertise has to say about its authenticity and meaning. This is followed by a historical interpretation of free will in major philosophical thinking in order to grasp its true sense, and its impact on the concept of personal responsibility. This philosophical questioning of free will brings us back to the Socratic thesis, “No one commits wrongdoing voluntarily.” Finally, the mimetic theory of René Girard contends that persecutors are fundamentally unaware and ignorant of what they are doing, and the theologian Lytta Basset argues that the illusion of knowing what is good and what is evil contributes to the ignorance that ignores itself. The third part of the thesis integrates the reflections and insights of the first two parts, as it brings forgiveness from the unforgivable endpoint to the healing endpoint. This is conceptualized in a schematic matrix of vertical and horizontal interactions. We discover that if the phrase “for they know not what they do” offers a reason-able answer to the question Why forgive? there is as well a second way that leads to forgiveness—love. Love is the key to forgiveness based on the evangelical message, while empathy is the primary means in the psychotherapeutic approach. Comparing “psychotherapeutic forgiveness” with “evangelical forgiveness” leads us to conclude that there are, in effect, two principal ways to access the gift of forgiveness—reason and love.

L’art symboliste pictural ou théâtral qui s’est développé à la fin du dix-neuvième siècle est habité par le sacré, que celui-ci se manifeste sous la forme du spirituel, du religieux ou sous toute autre forme (spiritisme, occultisme, mysticisme). Quelle que soit sa forme, le sacré est pour tous les symbolistes lié à l’art. Leurs recherches formelles, multiples et variées, tendent toutes à faire surgir l’invisible du visible. Or toutes voient l’émergence, dans les œuvres, de la représentation de la femme, qui dès lors devient intimement liée au «symbolisme». En véhiculant le sacré, la femme devient le symbole des idées des artistes sur leur art, voire le symbole du rapport de l’artiste à son art. Ainsi la thèse étudie la femme dans son rapport aux idées et à l’esthétique propres à chaque artiste, dans son interrelation avec l’art et le sacré et les études détaillées des œuvres dramatiques et picturales visent à montrer la variété et la complexité de ses représentations. En même temps, cette recherche est une étude d’ensemble concernant les relations entre le théâtre et la peinture dans la période fin-de-siècle, abordées non pas de l’extérieur, mais de l’intérieur (c’est-à-dire par les caractéristiques propres des œuvres), dans le cadre de la théorie de l’image ouverte, telle qu’elle a été développée par Georges Didi-Huberman. Finalement, que la forme d’expression artistique soit celle de l’art dramatique ou celle de l’art pictural, la femme n’est dans les œuvres que la manifestation d’une réflexion esthétique qui est aussi une réflexion philosophique, elle est le lieu de rencontre entre le Moi et l’Autre à partir duquel s’origine l’œuvre. / Symbolist art, be it pictorial or theatrical, which developed in the late nineteenth century was filled with sacredness, whatever its form: spiritual, religious or any other (spiritualism, occultism, mysticism). However in all its forms, sacredness is for all symbolists linked to Art. Formal research by symbolists, which is numerous and diverse, all tends to make the invisible visible. However all symbolists formal research saw in the works the emergence of the representation of women, which therefore becomes intimately linked to the "symbolism". By conveying sacredness, woman becomes the symbol of the ideas of the artists on their Art; even the symbol of the relationship of the artist to his Art. Thus this thesis studies woman in its relationship to the ideas and aesthetics of each artist, in its interrelationship with Art and the sacredness. The detailed studies of drama and paintings aim to show the variety and complexity of its representations. At the same time, this research is a global study on the relationship between theatre and painting in the end-of-century period, approached not from outside but from within (i.e. by the characteristics of works), as part of the theory of the open image developed by Georges Didi-Huberman. Finally, whatever the form of artistic expression – drama or painting – woman is only in the works, the manifestation of aesthetic reflection that is also a philosophical reflection, situated at the crossroads between the Ego and the Other, from which the work originates.

Nombre d’œuvres d’époque impériale montrent que Xénophon était considéré comme un modèle littéraire éminent. La présente thèse offre une analyse de la réception de Xénophon dans les discours de l’orateur Ælius Aristide, lesquels n’ont pas encore été traités sous cet angle. Les œuvres aristidiennes examinées sont : les Discours platoniciens (or. 2-4), le discours Sur la digression (or. 28), la déclamation En faveur de la paix avec les Athéniens (or. 8), l’ensemble des cinq Discours leuctriens (or. 11-15), les témoignages sur la déclamation perdue Callixène, le Panathénaïque (or. 1) et l’éloge À Rome (or. 26). L’histoire grecque a une importance cruciale dans cette enquête : Aristide s’est particulièrement intéressé aux événements de l’après Leuctres. L’analyse des références historiques aux Helléniques met en avant l’érudition de l’orateur et son intérêt pour les discours contenus dans cet ouvrage de Xénophon. L’examen du travail littéraire d’Aristide sur le texte de Xénophon pourra contribuer à améliorer l’exégèse des discours aristidiens analysés, et fournira un nouveau volet aux recherches sur la réception de Xénophon. / Several ancient literary works show that Xenophon was considered during the Imperial period as a preeminent model. The present study analyses the reception of Xenophon in Ælius Aristides’ speeches, which have never been explored from this perspective. The works taken into account are the Platonic speeches (or. 2-4), the speech Concerning a remark in passing (or. 28), the declamation On making peace with the Athenians (or. 8), the group of the five Leuctran orations (or. 11-15), the evidence of the lost declamation Callixenus, the Panathenaicus (or. 1) and the speech To Rome (or. 26). Greek history has a crucial importance in this investigation: Aristides was particularly concerned by the events following the battle of Leuctra. The examination of the historical allusions to Xenophon’s Hellenica reveals Aristides’ erudition and his interest in the speeches included in this work. Looking at Aristides’ use of Xenophon’s texts can contribute to improving the exegesis of the Aristidian works and open a new path into research on Xenophon’s reception.

This thesis offers a technically informed examination of Plato's pervasive, though not innocent, use of musical theory, practice and musical concepts more generally within the ambitious ethical project outlined in many of his dialogues: fostering the ‘excellence' of the soul. Starting from Republic 3, Chapter 1 will focus specifically on music stricto sensu in order to assess Plato's interpretation of the basic ‘building blocks' of musical performances, creating a core repertoire of musical concepts that will prepare the way to analyse Plato's use of musical terms or categories in areas that, at first sight, do not appear to be immediately connected to this art, such as politics, ethics and psychology. Chapter 2 examines a selection of passages from Laws 2 concerning the concept of musical beauty and its role in ethical education, demonstrating how Plato's definition is far from being moralistic and, instead, pays close attention to the technical performative aspects of dramatic musical representations. Chapter 3 looks first at the harmonic characterisation of the two central virtues of the ideal city, sophrosyne and dikaiosyne, showing how their musical depictions are not purely metaphoric: on the contrary, Plato exploited their cultural implications to emphasise the characteristics and the functions of these virtues in the ideal constitution. The second half of Chapter 3 analyses the Platonic portrayal of musical παρανομία, studying both its educational and psychological repercussions in the dialogue and in relations to contemporary Athenian musical practices. Chapter 4 looks at how different types of music may be used to create an inner harmonic order of passions in the soul in different contexts: the musical-mimetic education outlined in the Republic, the musical enhancement of the psychological energies in the members of the Chorus of Dionysus in the Laws, and finally the role of the aulos in the Symposium.

Made available in DSpace on 2015-03-05T17:20:08Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 29 / Nenhuma / A presente dissertação tem por objetivo a afirmação do Direito como “escritura”, que é ao mesmo tempo transgressora e conservadora da tradição jurídica. Para tanto, parte-se da aproximação do direito à literatura, investigando-se, mais precisamente, as relações que se estabelecem entre a tragédia grega e o direito. Nessa senda, investiga-se o panorama geral em que se inserem os estudos que aproximam o direito da literatura e vice-versa, e visita-se a poética aristotélica para, então, examinarem-se as características do gênero e do homem trágicos. São investigados conceitos básicos da Grécia Antiga – os conceitos de physis, ethos, nomos, hamartia, hybris, themis e diké - e, então, a passagem das estruturas de pré-direito ao direito que se desvela nos mitos gregos e, por conseqüência, no gênero trágico, com base nos estudos de Louis Gernet e Vernant.vIdentificada, a partir da Poética Aristotélica, a mimesis ínsita à literatura, e, reconhecida a tragédia como evento que coincide com a afirmação da democracia gre / The main objective of the present dissertation is the affirmation of the Law as “scripture”, which is, at same time, transgressor and conservative of the juridical tradition. In order to state so, one has to approach the Law to the Literature, more precisely investigating the relations that have been established between the Greek tragedy and the Law. This way, one has to investigate the general panorama in which the studies that approximate law and literature (and vice-versa) are inserted, and the Aristotelic poetics is visited in order to allow the gender and the tragic man characteristics to be examined. Basic concepts of the ancient Grece are herewith investigated – such as physis, ethos, nomos, hamartia, hybris, themis e diké – as well as the passage of the pre-law structures to the law itself which are unveiled in the Greek myths and, consequently, in the tragic gender based on studies signed by Louis Gernet and Vernant. Identified since the Aristotelic poetics, the mimesis inserted into Literature, and

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-27T17:27:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Rita de Cassia Oliveira.pdf: 727213 bytes, checksum: f30d8eb97ac55684b842083ec2899a65 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-04-22 / The present philosophical work bears the title The O Guesa poem by Sousândrade, in light of Paul Ricoeur s hermeneutics and intends to be an interpretation which has as paradigm the Paul Ricoeur s Phenomenological Hermeutics with respect to showing the meaning of the present existence in the symbolism of poetic foundation. I thematize the question of poetic language in its narrative aspect in the O Guesa poem and its correlation with the pertinent literature and philosophy to highlight the metaphoricity as a poetic language condition because it is constituted in a differentiated mode of thinking the world. Ricoeur turns to Aristotle Poetics and Rhetoric works as a starting point of his investigation on the significance of metaphor power when permitting that something is said indirectly by the joining of disconnected images having, nevertheless, an enclosed truth. I follow Ricoeur s same procedure in La métaphore vive, and look upon Aristotle for an understanding about the theory of metaphor in adequation to the analysis of the O Guesa poem. The development of the study reaches a correlation between the hermeneutic and the theory of narativity as to the interpretation of the act of narrating as an origin of rationality that tells actions and events according to an ordering which is characterized as the machination plot. Ricoeur s books that sustain this survey are, chiefly, La mémoire, l histoire, l oubli, Du texte à action and Temps et récit which reveal Ricoeur s reflection on the narrative identity as resulting from the interweaving of history with fiction. The narrative identity, a theme developed in Soi-même comme Un Autre, requires that Ricoeur imagine the subject in his interpersonal and institutional reflexives, bringing forth ethics and moral as indispensable knowledge for a philosophy which recognizes literature as being a vast laboratory of human experience / O presente escrito filosófico tem como título O poema O Guesa, de Sousândrade, à luz da Hermenêutica de Paul Ricoeur e pretende ser uma interpretação que tem como paradigma a Hermenêutica Fenomenológica de Paul Ricoeur no que visa o mostrar do sentido da existência presente no simbolismo da criação poética. Tematizo a questão da linguagem poética em seu aspecto narrativo no poema O Guesa e a correlação deste com a filosofia e a literatura que lhe são pertinentes, para destacar a metaforicidade como uma condição da linguagem poética por se constituir num modo diferenciado de pensar o mundo. Ricoeur recorre a Aristóteles, propriamente às obras Poética e Retórica, como ponto de partida da sua investigação sobre o poder de sentido da metáfora ao possibilitar que algo seja dito de modo indireto pela junção de imagens descontínuas possuindo, entretanto, uma verdade contida. Sigo o mesmo procedimento de Ricoeur em La métaphore vive, e busco Aristóteles um entendimento acerca da teoria da metáfora em adequação com a análise do poema O Guesa. O desdobramento desse estudo alcança a correlação entre hermenêutica e teoria da narratividade quanto à interpretação do ato de narrar como originário de uma racionalidade que conta ações e acontecimentos segundo uma ordenação que se caracteriza como tessitura da intriga. Os livros de Ricoeur que fundamentam essa investigação são, mormente, La mémoire, l histoire, l oubli, Du texte à action e Temps et récit que revelam a reflexão de Ricoeur sobre a identidade narrativa como resultante do entrecruzamento da história com a ficção. A identidade narrativa, tema desenvolvido em Soi-même comme un Autre, exige que Ricoeur pense o sujeito em suas mediações reflexivas interpessoais e institucionais, fazendo aparecer a ética e a moral como conhecimentos imprescindíveis para uma filosofia que reconhece ser a literatura um vasto laboratório de experiência humana

Dans sa provenance platonicienne, l’idéal de l’incarnation de l’Idée doit à la fois affronter des individualités (pré)déterminées et qualitativement différentes (le pluralisme) – qui sont répétitions et répétées elles-mêmes. Il doit devenir le vouloir-dire de la personne qui s’efforce de mettre en œuvre ce dernier et qui cherche à franchir les limites ontologiques de la représentation. Cependant, l’irréalisabilité de la pure répétition du vouloir-dire – ou de n’importe quel « sujet » – atteste de la présence absente du même dans le processus de sa mise en œuvre ; la répétition est toujours déjà répétition différenciatrice, son acte même toujours susceptible d’être perçu comme mimétique en pratique. Lorsque nous « créons », nous cherchons une différence absolue (singularisation) tout en visant l’universalité du vouloir-dire, l’Univocité. Autrement dit, c’est l’inévitabilité de la répétition différenciatrice (« nouveauté ») qui se répète et tend vers un dernier résultat censé être absolument univoque et intersubjectivement compris et jugé. Cette inévitabilité signifie-t-elle une (ou la dernière) impasse théorique – une « fin » – insurmontable ? Comment les artistes, les historiens d’art et les philosophes s’y prennent-ils ? Entre l’origine et le futur de l’art, quelle puissance de la répétition devrait-on y chercher pour ne plus répéter « une répétition pour toute » ? / From its Platonic source, the ideal of embodiment of Idea must face individualities which are (pre)determined and qualitatively different – and are themselves repetitions repeated. It must become “what-is-wanted-to-be-said” or “meaning” (“vouloir-dire”) of the person who endeavors to realize it and to attempt to exceed the ontological limits of representation. Meanwhile, the unrealizability of pure repetition of the “vouloir-dire” – like any other “subject matter” – testifies to the absent presence of the same in the process of its realization; each and every repetition is always already a differential repetition, and its act itself always susceptible to be taken as mimetic in practice. When we “create”, we search for the absolute difference (singularization) while aiming at a universality of the “vouloir-dire”, Univocity. Put another way, it is the inevitability of the differential repetition (“newness”) that repeats itself and moves towards the last outcome that is meant to be unique in itself and intersubjectively understood and judged. Does this inevitability point towards a (or the last) insurmountable theoretical stalemate – “an end”? How do artists, art-historians, and philosophers deal with this problem? Between the origin and the future of art, what sort of force of repetition do we have to look for in order to finally no longer repeat “one repetition for all”?