Just Figures? Forensic Clairvoyance, Mathematics, and the Language Question

Dados Bibliográficos

ID5339276
AutoresKirby (0000-0001-9496-8685, autor correspondente), Vicki Kirby
Ano2005
Volume34
Fascículo2
Páginas3-36
Data de publicação2005-01-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessNão
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoSubStance (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0049-2426 • E-ISSN: 1527-2095
EditoraProject MUSE (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1353/sub.2005.0033
OpenAlexW2054910789
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas1
Referências citadas15

A written symbol long recognized as operating non-alphabetically—even by those deeply and quite unconsciously committed to alphabeticism—is that of number... But, despite this recognition, there has been no sustained attention to mathematical writing even remotely matching the enormous outpouring of analysis, philosophizing, and deconstructive opening up of what those in the humanities have come simply to call "texts." Why, one might ask, should this be so? Why should the sign system long acknowledged as the paradigm of abstract rational thought and the without-which-nothing of Western technoscience have been so unexamined, let alone analyzed, theorized, or deconstructed, as a mode of writing? (Rotman, "Thinking Dia-Grams," 18) Predictive Mysteries: Giving a Face to the Question Jetlagged in the déjà-vu routine of hotel arrival and collapse, I found the mesmerism of my soporific reverie suddenly interrupted by one of those forensic journeys of witness on The Learning Channel. There was nothing especially remarkable about what it had to say; in fact it was just another example of the various excuses for scientific sleuthing that fill our screens every night. This particular narrative concerned the chance discovery of a human skull, an "anonym" as it's technically called—human remains devoid of any form of identification. A dearth of clues maintained the bones' stubborn and seductive mystery and forced the investigative team to look elsewhere for answers. But it was the counter-intuitive presumption that an entirely different context's data might betray the skull's identity that caught my attention on this occasion, for it suddenly seemed curious that things with no apparent connection to the material under scrutiny could unlock the secret of its provenance. Before I discuss the outcome of the forensic artist's endeavors in this case, I want to make a brief detour to explain the techniques involved in such facial reconstruction. As a preliminary musing in regard to this argument's larger concerns, I also want to consider why "fleshing out" the contours of soft tissue can elicit such extraordinary fascination. Why [End Page 3] do we assume that bone poses a riddle that only flesh can resolve, as if the subject has a dimensional "out-come" or existence on just one surface; as if the face operates as personal signature and guarantee? Is this a legacy of phrenology, where the relationship of bumps on the skull was thought to disclose character and personality traits?—for surely we remain secretly attached to the idea of ciphering someone's essence from certain external signs. The face arrests us and seems to focus and distill that elusive "something"—that individual essence that animates a body's overall demeanor. Similarly, we want to know what people from the past actually looked like because we interpret the face as a register of life's vicissitudes. Although we might be aware of the historical detail that surrounded such figures as King Philip II of Macedon or King Midas, in the recent forensic reconstruction of these men's faces we see a neighbor, a friend, or even an enemy; we look for a familiar resemblance that might provide us with clues to their actual disposition or temperament.1 Facial reconstructions are a relatively recent undertaking, falling neatly within Michel Foucault's determination of the modern epistémè of human self-interrogation. The first experimental attempts at an accurate identification were initiated by the anatomist His, who sought to determine if the purported remains of Johann Sebastian Bach were indeed those of the famous composer (Prag and Neave, 15). The relationship of a particular skull to its facial morphology had already been investigated through simple observation, comparing an artist's representation or likeness, such as a portrait-bust, with the particular contours of the skull. However, it wasn't until His in 1895 that a scientific method of facial reconstruction was seriously considered. This involved dividing the skull into a template of measurements—a grid

Aesthetics · Art · Context (archaeology) · Epistemology · Face (sociological concept) · Identification (biology) · Identity (music) · Linguistics · Literature · Narrative · Nothing · Presumption · Sign (mathematics) · Symbol (formal) · Witness · Digital Humanities and Scholarship · History · Intelligence, Security, War Strategy · Law · Mathematics · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Psychology