Learning objectives
The course aims to provide:
- Descriptor 1 (Knowledge and understanding): in-depth knowledge on a classic theme of aesthetic reflection; the ability to understand aesthetic-philosophical texts, even complex, analyzing and discussing the theories contained in them; analytical and logical-argumentative skills for what concerns artistic language and the relationship it has with other languages and forms of knowledge (scientific and philosophical).
- Descriptor 2 (Applying knowledge and understanding): ability to apply the logical-argumentative techniques in a particular case (the question of metaphor), assessing the correctness and logical rigour; the ability to argue and expose some thesis in writing, and comparing them to the critical bibliography.
- Descriptor 3 (Making judgments): ability to integrate knowledge and to approach critically aesthetic-philosophical concepts and theories; ability to infer, from reading a text, the author's theoretical perspective; ability to analyze thoroughly an aesthetic-philosophical problem, by reconstructing in autonomous way the main lines of interpretation and the related bibliography.
- Descriptor 4 (Communication skills): ability to communicate clearly and strictly his own thesis, to both specialist and non-specialist.
- Descriptor 5 (Learning skills): ability to understand, analyze and discuss new aesthetic and philosophical theories, even in an interdisciplinary framework
Prerequisites
Basic philosophical knowledge.
Course unit content
Course title: "As the images mean. Symbols, artistic languages and new media".
The course will focus on the question of meaning in artistic images, ie the way in which they symbolize something or convey certain content, organizing them within formal structures. After analyzing the theories of Panofsky and Barthes, we will examine the perspective developed by Nelson Goodman in the Languages of Art, i.e. in the context of a philosophical constructivism that criticizes the idea of knowledge as a unique and objective description of the world, and underlines the similarities between art and science, between verbal and nonverbal symbols, between literal and metaphorical statements. The example of visual metaphors will also allow us to focus how the status and the use of images - both artistic and of another kind – are changing in the age of technical and digital reproducibility.
Full programme
- - -
Bibliography
- E. Panofsky, Il significato nelle arti visive (any edition), only the chapter “Iconografia e iconologia.
Introduzione allo studio dell’arte del Rinascimento”.
- R. Barthes, L’ovvio e l’ottuso. Saggi critici III (any edition), only the chapter “Retorica dell’immagine” (text available on the website of the Course).
- N. Goodman, I linguaggi dell’arte (any edition), only the first two chapters: “Rifare la realtà”; “Il suono delle immagini”.
- C. Forceville, Pictorial and multimodal metaphor, 2016 (article available on the website of the Course).
- W. Benjamin, L’opera d’arte nell’epoca della sua riproducibilità tecnica, Einaudi, (any edition), only the chapter “L’opera d’arte nell’epoca della sua riproducibilità tecnica”.
W.J.T. Mitchell, Pictorial turn: saggi di cultura visuale, Raffaello Cortina, 2017
Teaching methods
The main contents of the course will be analysed and discussed in the framework of the frontal lessons. The lessons will be accompanied by in-depth seminars, in which the analysis of the texts and the critical contextualization of the texts will be given particular importance. Individual exercises in the form of written reports are also planned, in which the student will be able to apply the knowledge and skills learned, while at the same time developing autonomy of judgement and the ability to communicate his theses clearly and rigorously.
The course will be carried out in blending mode: some lessons will be carried out by videoconference from the Aula CEA of Unimore (Viale Allegri 13, Reggio Emilia), recorded and made available on the specific portal http://moodle.filosofia.edunova.it.
Assessment methods and criteria
- Mode of the final assessment: a written report on a topic agreed with the teacher and an oral interview. Each of the two tests will be evaluated in thirty, and the final grade will be the average between the two votes. The examination as a whole is passed if the average of the two votes is at least 18/30.
- The oral examination, by means of open questions on the topics covered in the course, will check both the acquisition of knowledge and understanding, both the analytical and logical argumentation. The written report will test the ability to apply knowledge and logical- argumentative techniques in a particular case, and to communicate their thesis in a clear and rigorous way; it will also verify the ability to expose critical concepts and theories, even independently tracking the most relevant literature in relation to a given problem.
GRID FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF WRITTEN REPORT
INDICATORS DESCRIPTORS SCORES
1. Ability to apply knowledges and logical-argumentative techniques
From 0 to 10
Deficient or elementary. 0-6
Comprehensive and consistent. 7-8
Strong analytical skills, logical and thematic coherence and originality of the development argument. 9-10
2. Ability to communicate clearly and strictly his own thesis From 0 to 8
Syntax poorly articulated, poor vocabulary, use of languages irrelevant specific disciplinary, lack of clarity and lack of rigour in the enunciation. 0-5
Sufficiently articulated syntax, simple vocabulary, use of languages quite relevant disciplinary specific, clarity and rigour enough in the enunciation. 6-7
Articulated syntax, rich vocabulary, appropriate use of language specific disciplinary, proceed rigorous and clear enunciation. 8
3. Ability to expose in a critical way concepts and theories From 0 to 13
Nothing, poor or partial. 0-6
Overall organic and consistent, but without the ability to track independently the most relevant critical bibliography. 7-10
Outstanding ability to provide interpretations critically founded, and to trace in an autonomous way the most relevant critical bibliography. 11-13
BANDS OF SCORING
EXCELLENT: 28-30
DISTINGUISHED: 25-27
GOOD: 22-24
SUFFICIENT: 18-21
INSUFFICIENT: 0 to 17
EVALUATION GRID OF ORAL EXAMINATION
INDICATORS DESCRIPTORS SCORES
1. . Knowledge From 0 to 10
Incomplete or essential, with inaccuracies. 0-3
Comprehensive enough, but with inaccuracies. 4-6
Full, fair, well-organized and thorough. 7-10
2. Understanding Form 0 to 10
Deficient or elementary. 0-3
Overall organic and in-depth. 4-7
Strong ability to understand and discuss texts and theories, in an accurate and thorough way. 8-107
3. Analytical and logical-argumentative skills From 0 to 11
Lacking or elementary. 0-4
Overall organic and consistent, with fair or enough logical rigour. 5-8
Outstanding ability to analyze texts and theories, and to develop a coherent argument, wealth of references and logical rigour. 9-11
Other information
- - -
