The purpose of Umberto Eco, one of the most noted literary figures of the contemporary era, in this article begins in expressing the problem of representing space into words. He begins with the major exponents of classical rhetorics and these definitions include expressing hypotyposis (the phenomena of vivid description) as a believable image of something that seems to lead the public into its very presence to a kind of parading before the eyes of things that have been done (Eco, p.180). Eco argues that even though rhetoricians are unable to explain at certain points what a hypotyposis is, they do present to us magnificent examples of it. There is mention of physical posture, pose, description of unpleasantness at great length and detailed and moving description of extended sequences of actions. There are differing techniques which the author uses in order to describe differing actions, movements, postures and live descriptions. Eco concludes that hypotyposis does not exist as a specific rhetorical figure (Eco, p.185). Through language we describe the external world; with that comes the use of language for artistic reasons. This happens through a variety of techniques that is not reduced to formulae as it can be done to mathematical figures.
The question of space has various interpretations: Newtonian, Kantian, Bergsonian, Cartesian and phenomenological. Each describes space in its own context: through absolute entities, or through intuitions and conditions that are beyond absolution.
There are however many reflections on how spatial arts represent space. Eco puts forth, with examples, the fact that to represent a long period of time one needs large portions of space. To grasp the flow of Piero’s frescoes, you will have to move not only with your eyes, but with your feet (Eco, p. 187). Gothic cathedrals require for a long period of attention to completely understand the visuals. Eco wants to say that sometimes while speaking of spatial expression, the space itself is not described as particularly as it describes something else: ‘a bleak outlook’, ‘boundless culture’, ‘middle of the night’ (Eco, p. 188). He examines some techniques on the verbal expression of space.
The first technique is denoting which is the most simple, immediate, mechanical form (Eco, p. 188), for example, stating that there is a distance of twenty kilometers between two points. The second technique is ‘detailed description’ (Eco, p. 188). We describe that a square has a church to the right and an ancient palace to the left. For hypotyposis to exist, as it was seen in the first example of Robert-Grillet’s The Voyeur, the description must not say more than what leads the reader to collaborate with the text and adding his own details to make a complete picture. The third technique is of ‘lists’ (Eco, p. 191). It creates spatial images without establishing priorities. Eco gives the example of Leopold Bloom’s kitchen in Ulysses which listed a plethora of items without priority (Eco, p. 192) or affect and only existent with its simple, spatial existence. Accumulation is the fourth technique in which events have to be either incongruous or extraordinary (Eco, p. 194). The fifth technique is of the ‘description appealing to the addressee’s personal experience’ (Eco, p. 195). Eco uses the example of Abbott’s Flatland which activates not only pre-existing cognitive schemes but pre-existing bodily experiences, for example, ‘Place a penny in the middle of your tables’. Hypotyposis, Eco concludes (Eco, p. 199), is a semantic-pragmatic phenomenon and requires strategies in order to be fulfilled effectively. More than a technique it is an effort to elicit a visual image for the reader. However, in order for the hypotyposis to work, in order for it to exist, the addressee must also collaborate with the text (Eco, p. 200), in his hands as well as in his mind.
Work Cited
Eco, Umberto. On Literature. Orlando: Harcourt Inc. 2002.