Critical Terms: Representation

This is the second of a series of weekly posts on the book Critical Terms for Literary Study.

W.J.T. Mitchell begins his survey of the term “representation” by observing the truism that literature represents life. As such, the concept of representation has long been a problem IN literature and a problem FOR the study of literature.

Question: what does representation involve? A fourfold process whereby SOMEONE represents SOMETHING (i.e. a message) BY SOMETHING (I.e. a medium like words or pictures) to SOMEONE. One axis is about SYMBOLISM. The other axis is about COMMUNICATION. Sometimes, these axes can create miscommunication, for instance when the symbols we’ve chosen to communicate with actually garble the message.

Mitchell explains that there are three kinds of symbols: iconic, symbolic, and indexical. The ICON resembles what it stands for. The SYMBOLIC is an arbitrarily appointed stand in. The INDEX has some existential connection to what it stands for. Theories of art favor or disapprove of particular kinds of representation. Mimesis celebrates it. So does the expressivist theory of art which champion the way in which a work of art represents the mind of its creator. Plato thought that art was representative but for that same reason condemned it. On the other hand, formalist or abstract approaches to art disconnect the obvious modes of representation.

Let’s end, then, with some theological correctives to Mitchell’s analysis…

1. First, human beings are not just symbol MAKERS. They themselves ARE symbols. People represent God. Any true theory of representation must begin with God’s creation of humanity in His image. This corrects Mitchell’s assertion that representation is primarily about politics and ideology. In fact, representation is primarily religious.
2. Next, since representation is VISIBLE HIERARCHY and moves from the declaration of TRANSCENDENCE in word to the IMAGE of representation in appearance, we should admit that God’s transcendence stands behind all authorized modes of human representation. Christ is the ultimate symbol of God’s covenantal relationship with people. Christ is THE WORD. In Mitchell’s model, words are the most symbolic of representations (meaning they are the most arbitrary). In the biblical model displayed in the covenant, words hold a special authority.
3. Mitchell ends by saying that representation requires taxation. True. But what is that taxation? For Mitchell it involves a lack of immediacy and truth. For the Christian, representation requires a submission to God’s ultimate authority and a submission to His declared covenant rules. But this is not a means of separating us from truth. Representation is not a product of the fall. It is a product of finitude which stems from our being creatures. We should be so sure that representation impedes our access to truth. The modes of representation (literary to political) that most closely fit that covenant will succeed in time.