My Chapter Upon Lines: Motion, Deviation, and Lineation in Eighteenth-Century British Aesthetics.

This essay argues that the eighteenth-century emergence of algebraic and arithmetic methods that require only numeric operators and that do not base their claims to truth upon Euclidean axiomatic geometric magnitudes and relations (lines, angles, proportions) transformed the ontological status of li...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Criticism Vol. 61; no. 1; pp. 1 - 27
Main Author: MacKenzie, Scott R.
Format: Article
Published: Wayne State University Press Winter2019
Subjects:
Online Access:View this record in EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=137149912&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 137149912
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00111589
        CIS
      jtl: Criticism
      issn: 00111589
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Winter2019
      vid: 61
      iid: 1
      pid: 426
      pub: Wayne State University Press
    artinfo:
      ui:
        137149912
        10.13110/criticism.61.1.0001
      ppf: 1
      ppct: 26
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 1.6MB
      tig:
        atl: My Chapter Upon Lines: Motion, Deviation, and Lineation in Eighteenth-Century British Aesthetics.
      aug:
        au: MacKenzie, Scott R.
      su:
        British aesthetics
        Euclidean geometry
        Hogarth, William, 1697-1764
        Fanaticism
        Aesthetics
      sug:
        subj:
          British aesthetics
          Euclidean geometry
          Hogarth, William, 1697-1764
          Fanaticism
          Aesthetics
      ab: This essay argues that the eighteenth-century emergence of algebraic and arithmetic methods that require only numeric operators and that do not base their claims to truth upon Euclidean axiomatic geometric magnitudes and relations (lines, angles, proportions) transformed the ontological status of lines. For classicist geometers, the points and magnitudes of Euclid had a status akin to the Longinian sublime: the classical line is not simply a symbol mediating an absent truth; rather, the classical line should be understood as the thing itself. After arithmetization, however, the line is only an inscription, another symbol among many, subject to the gulf between signifier and signified. It is also relegated to an effect of, rather than the organizing principle of, motion, and hence enters history. Aesthetic theorists contribute significantly to the reconceptualization of lineation. From William Hogarth's infinite variety, to Edmund Burke's insensible deviation, to Laurence Sterne's digressive progression and William Gilpin's easy line, aesthetic orthodoxies arise that are founded in deviation from rigid prescription and from prior axiomatic models. Aesthetically and politically, a positively construed but semantically empty notion of deviation helps to generate the fantasy of subjects in relationships to spectacles and institutions that are not mediated by any ideological structures other than personal affective sensation. Precisely because the Burkean/Gilpinesque subject/spectator recognizes himself as deviant (which is to say ungoverned by doctrine, fanaticism, or standards imposed against the grain of his own intuitions), his participation in the frame of polity and the spectacle of nation can be understood as wholly natural and volitional, not to say homogeneous. At the same time, the aesthetics of deviation can be seen as key to the modernist avant-garde, preserving a close parallel between its premises and the supposedly radically distinct values of bourgeois aesthetics.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Criticism is the property of Wayne State University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Criticism
      holder: Wayne State University Press
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2019
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N