Caricature, recognition, misrepresentation

Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Caricature undeniably excels at mocking people and their foibles. But is this mode of depiction limited to human beings? Can animals, objects, or even abstract concepts be caricatured? The first goal of this paper is to trace the limits of the caricaturable and see how far they extend beyond the human figure. The second goal is to understand how the wondrous modification enacted by caricature works. To do so, I analyze the features that caricature selects, and argue that such features have a relational nature—they are instantiated by the depicted subject but their sense hinges on implicit norms. I then outline the deep structure of reference exploited by caricature for depicting. Finally, I use this account to unravel the paradox of caricature: how can a picture both misrepresent its subject and prompt an accurate recognition? I defend the controversial claim that caricature per se does not amount to misrepresentation.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-05-22

Downloads
445 (#64,916)

6 months
377 (#4,926)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Federico Fantelli
University of Antwerp

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Painting as an Art.Richard Wollheim - 1987 - Princeton University Press.
Threefoldness.Bence Nanay - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 175 (1):163-182.
Canny resemblance.Catharine Abell - 2009 - Philosophical Review 118 (2):183-223.
Understanding Pictures.Domenic Lopes - 2000 - Mind 109 (433):158-162.

View all 19 references / Add more references