Painting Borges: Philosophy Interpreting Art Interpreting Literature by Jorge J. E Gracia (review)

Jorge J. E. Gracia intertwines three sets of interpretations of twelve of Borges’s best known short stories: one philosophical, by Gracia, as a reader; a second, in the graphic expressions several artists have made of the stories, as readers and artists; and a third of those works of art from the point of view of the critic, as reader of images.

Gracia aptly applies his personal theory of interpretation, as set out in the final chapter, which is based on an analysis of the distinctions between the identity of works of visual art, philosophy, and literature. His starting point is differentiation based on the text: as conveyer of concepts, arguments, or facts that adhere to given rules (philosophy); as part of its identity (literature); or as an artistic expression that includes the artifact itself (visual art). The author’s arguments are exemplified by Borges’s work and the works by the seventeen contemporary Argentinean and Cuban artists that he has included, with attention to representative periods of interpretation and execution of their paintings.

The initial chapters demonstrate the application of this aforementioned theory to the evaluation of the graphic interpretations of Borges’s short stories by using the categories developed within it: interpretive strategies, reference and title, focus, literal and metaphorical readings, and transposition. Gracia concludes that even though the approaches used by the artists were varied, “the works that they have produced constitute de facto unambiguous statements as to what they consider an interpretation to be” (227).

The author approaches literature and art from a hermeneutical point of view, relying on philosophers such as Foucault, Derrida, and Danto for comparative analysis and discussion. He also seeks to redress the lack of recognition of Latin American discourse in philosophy, which he ascribes to the implicit geographical boundaries of philosophy in modernity. Following Eduardo Mendieta, Gracia asserts that from the postmodern perspective, one ought to “change the way we approach philosophy and literature to make room for Latin America in the philosophical world” (157). He considers that there is already enough philosophy in Latin America that “meets the strictest standards of a philosophical work or text” (83), so he denies that any redefinition of the discipline is necessary in order to legitimize Latin American contributions. Defining philosophy as the conveying of ideas, he identifies Borges as an author who incorporates both literature and philosophy in his writings. A philosophical text, according to Gracia, can be translated in languages other than the one in which it is written, “whereas neither Borges’s stories nor their artistic interpretations are translatable” (184).

On the question of the legitimacy of the artists’ interpretations of literary texts, he observes relations between Borges’s stories and some elements emphasized by the artists, which are evident “not only in the context of the artistic interpretation of literature . . . but also in the philosophical interpretation of literature and art” (251). Gracia is aided in his understanding of the visual representation of the story by the contextualization of the artist’s body of work to draw meaning from recurring symbols and styles. A salient example is that of Mirta Kupferminc’s digital print of Con el fuego, which interprets “The Circular Ruins.” Gracia seeks to make sense of the chair that appears in the print when he writes, “A chair is a symbol of waiting, anticipation, rest. . . . Are we being invited to sit on it and get involved in the endless cycle of the universe? . . . In Jewish culture, the locus of learning is a Yeshiva, a place to sit and learn” (87), thus, situating Borges’s story within Jewish culture and mythology.

Gracia presents his claims as provisional and open to further investigation and analysis, but he is certain “that the thesis concerning the artistic interpretation of literature that inspires this book is in line with Borges’s thinking” (251). This brings us to an important point: the interpretations offered in this book are solely the author’s. There...