• Art History and Visual Culture
• /
• no.21
• /
• pp.126-147
• /
• 2018

This paper is to find the theme and meaning of the Beauvais Grotesque tapestry considered a conundrum. The three works are chosen from Beauvais Grotesque consisting of six tapestries, which are The Offering to Pan, The Musician and Dancers, The Camel in the J. Paul Getty Museum. I analyzed these works by dividing them into grotesque ornaments, chinoiserie motifs, and scenography. The Offering to Pan shows the influence of Raphael's Grotesque tapestry, but Beauvais work followed the design of Jean Berain's Grotesque with arabesque. In The Musician and Dancers, chinese ceramics, textiles, and Chinese people in edge were noted. Especially, the Chinese with yellow skin in the border reveals the European gaze on China at that time. In the 18th century, Chinoiserie was prevalent through stage designs rather than books. The Camel, playing Brighella, makes it clear that this tapestry is a stage of Comedia dell'arte. The characteristic of Comedia is a mixture of genres such as music and dance, with no scripting 'improvisation.' Features of Comedia are 'improvisation' without a script and a mixture of genres such as music and dance. Thus, the Grotesque tapestry transfers the stage of the Comedia into threads woven. In addition, the horizontal stage decoration with the disappearance of the perspective vanishing point is related to the era of regent of Philippe d'Orl?ans (1674-1723). Above all, the grotesque, Chinoiserie, and scenography are all fantasies separated from reality. Therefore, the Beauvais Grotesque tapestry represents of 'improvisation' and 'fantasy' in which there is no narrative theme or meaning, as if the script of Comedia did not exist.

• Korean Journal of Logic
• /
• v.18 no.2
• /
• pp.217-241
• /
• 2015

Brandom upholds the anaphoric theory of reference. On this theory, reference is a relation of anaphoric dependence between linguistic items rather than a substantial relation between linguistic items and non-linguistic objects. In addition, 'refers' is a pronoun-forming operator, which is used to form anaphorically indirect descriptions such as 'the one referred to as "Leibniz"'. Recently, Arbid $B{\aa}ve$ raises three objections against this theory. First, the anaphoric theory distinguishes between ordinary descriptions and anaphorically indirect descriptions in terms of iterability. But this condition is not an adequate ground for asserting that anaphorically indirect descriptions form a distinctive semantic category. Second, sentences containing a pronoun such as 'he' and sentences containing an anaphorically indirect description such as 'the one referred to as "Leibniz"' have different modal statuses. Consequently, indirect descriptions are semantically different from paradigmatic anaphors. Third, on the anaphoric theory, expressions of the form 'a' and the corresponding indirect descriptions of the form 'the one referred to as "a"' are intersubstitutable. But we can make an equivalent claim by using the more general semantic concepts such as equivalence and intersubstitutability, instead of using notions such as 'anaphor' and 'antecedent'. So the anaphoric theory is explanatorily idle. In this paper I argue that these objections do not pose a serious problem for the anaphoric theory of reference. I argue thereby that the anaphoric theory of reference is a promising theory which provides us with the right understanding of the expression 'refers'.