

Curiosity is not going to kill this cat/La curiosité n'a jamais été un vilain défaut.



After taking a joyful detour by Pondicherry, the Indian Ocean Islands, New York under the snow, and a flamenco show, we're back to "The Art of Memory" by Frances Yates. My interest for this book does not stem from a desire to acquire mnemonic tricks. I am sure bookstores sell books, amongst the thousands of self help books on their shelves, which offer these tools. I wanted to introduce her book because of an interesting paradox developed by its thesis. She argues that the mnemonic technique developed in ancient times, and modified in the middle ages, has influenced the shape of western culture. During the middle ages, instead of situating objects of memorisation in a temple, scholars placed them in paradise. Or hell. This imaginary space was divided into circles, alcoves, to offer the loci necessary to memory. Yates puts forward the hypothesis that this structure, devised to serve as a mnemonic tool, has conditioned the conception of paradise and hell. And, furthermore, has contributed to the western obsession with classification and fragmentation. See frescoes and altarpieces from the middle ages, many examples at the bottom of this blog. Hell (and Paradise) by Dante. There is something delightful to the mind in this paradox, i.e. that a technique to memorize cultural products has evolved into an instrument of change of this very culture's Imaginary. Hence the works that one would memorize, such as Dante's texts, would have been transformed by that very memorization technique. Then again it could be complete bullshit.
The art of memory's relationship to the Imaginary changed direction again in the 16th century. Giulio Camillo built, without ever finishing it, a Theater of Memory (see above a representation produced by Yates). This half circle made out of wood was divided into seven parts which were in turn divided into seven, and then again into seven, resulting in 343 compartments. The divisions followed astrology and bore emblems and symbols. Standing on the stage, the viewer could see at once the total knowledge ... of alchemists. After having transformed the religious Imaginary in the middle ages, the art of memory became esoteric in the Renaissance.




Après ce passage si intéressant à Pondichéry et dans les îles de l'Océan Indien, je retourne brièvement à "The Art of Memory" de Frances Yates. Mon intérêt pour ce livre ne vient pas de ce qu'il offre une technique de mémorisation utile. Je suis sûre que, avec tous les manuels de ci et de ça offerts dans les librairies, vous en trouveriez une pléthore dédiés à toutes sortes d'inventions mnémoniques. Ce qui a retenu mon attention dans ce livre, c'est la thèse paradoxale que Yates développe: cette technique de mémorisation inventée dans l'antiquité et modifiée au moyenâge aurait influencé le dévelopement de la culture occidentale. Au moyen âge, au lieu d'utiliser un temple comme locus où situer des objets de mémorisation, on choisit le paradis. Ou l'enfer. Cet espace fut divisé en cercle, en loges, dans le but d'offrir les loci nécessaires. Et Yates offre comme hypothèse que cette structure élaborée comme outil de mémorisation, est entrées dans l'imaginaire en transformant la conception du paradis et de l'enfer. Et par extension, l'habitude occidentale de tout fragmenter et classifier. Voir par exemple les fresques et tableaux du moyen âge (ci-dessus, Maesta, de Duccio). L'Enfer (et le Paradis) de Dante. Je me délecte du paradoxe qu'une technique servant à mémoriser des productions culturelles ait évolué en un instrument de transformation de l'imaginaire et de ses oeuvres.
