[Crm-sig] Issue: questionable Sunrise

Christian-Emil Ore c.e.s.ore at iln.uio.no
Fri Dec 11 10:40:11 EET 2009

A sunrise is an event. In the Monet case it may or may not be. In the 
case the painting describes a generalised conceptual understanding of a 
sunrise it is in my opinion not.

The Norwegian painter Edvard Munch connects  in his writings his 
painting "Scream" to a  concrete event when he and some friends walked 
in a park just outside  the centre of Oslo (Kristiania)  in the early 
1880s apparently in the late afternoon (early spring or late autumn) 
when the sun was setting and Munch got the sensation of the existential 
scream of nature. Thus the painting depicts this feeling (concept) as 
well as in some sense the  stroll-event.

I think d) is the best solution but the Munch example may be too 
complicated from a pedagogical point of view although it is a pretty 
well known painting.


On 10.12.2009 21:35, martin wrote:
> Are you sure? Did Monet not paint in the nature? I remember some French
> term of plein-airists...
> We have four choices:
> a) accept the sunrise as event
> b) find a better class for the sunrise
> c) regard the depiction as conceptual, but for an IMPRESSIONIST, that 
> causes me headaches
> d) find a less ambiguous example and postpone our understanding of the 
> true nature of the sunrise
> Cheers,
> Martin
> Christian-Emil Ore wrote:
>> I have another comment. Monet painting does not depict any particular 
>> sunrise, just the concept of the sun rising (over Le Havre). So the 
>> example should perhaps be replaced or changed from event to type or 
>> conceptual object.
>> Chr-Emil
>> On 10.12.2009 16:03, martin wrote:
>>> Dear Oeyvind,
>>> Sure, we know what a sunrise is. I meant, what is the superclass of 
>>> "sunrise" in the CRM.
>>> I could regard it, as you say, as just a time-span (with time-zone). 
>>> An E5 Event should bring about
>>> a change of state. That it will be daylight after the sunrise could 
>>> be regarded as a change of state, even
>>> though the daylight line just sweeps over the earth. There is
>>> however no interaction associated with it, as with any other 
>>> occurrence patterns between
>>> independtly moving things. There is no objective notion of 
>>> "participants". There is no notion
>>> of things "meeting", except may be for the photons. In this sense, 
>>> driving a car from A to B could
>>> be seen as consisting of thousands of events of passing stones next 
>>> to the road.
>>> We could regard is as E4 Period, since in the scope note we say, 
>>> there is no need for change of state,
>>> and assign a place and time to it.
>>>  From a point of physics, there is no energy-mediated interaction 
>>> between the participants, as with activities,
>>> building crashes etc.
>>> Just to clarify, where the borders of an event are. Is "passing by" 
>>> at a distance without interaction an event
>>> in the sense we need for the CRM? Do I pass by Auckland in a sense on 
>>> my way from home to my bureau in Heraklion?
>>> I suspect we are touching the notion of "situation" we have avoided 
>>> to model so far.
>>> Interesting problem, isn't it?
>>> Best,
>>> Martin
>>> Øyvind Eide wrote:
>>>> Den 10. des.. 2009 kl. 14.38 skrev martin:
>>>>> Dear All,
>>>>> "“Impression Sunrise” by Monet (E84) depicts sun rising over Le 
>>>>> Havre (E5) mode of depiction Impressionistic (E55)" :
>>>>> One may argue, that "Sunrise over Le Havre" depicts a place and a 
>>>>> certain timespan, but the sunrise itself might
>>>>> not be seen as a process in the sense of the CRM, since it is just 
>>>>> a question of a view on a constellation of deeply
>>>>> independent things (rather a "situation"). May be, we should avoid 
>>>>> the example, until we better know what a sunrise is?
>>>> Dear Martin, and all,
>>>> If we do not know now what a sunrise is, will we know better in the 
>>>> future?
>>>> I think the problem is not the word "sunrise". It is a normal word 
>>>> with several related meanings: e.g. " a time of day", or "any 
>>>> (major) awakening", as a dictionary will tell us.
>>>> The problem is rather than when such a word is used in the title of 
>>>> a painting, the meaning is not fixed, so that it can mean the time 
>>>> of day, or it can mean the start of a new, totally different part of 
>>>> person's life, just to take two examples. In order to model such a 
>>>> text in a formalism such as CRM, one of the meaning must be chosen 
>>>> (or maybe several, but always fewer than the potential total number 
>>>> of possible meaning).
>>>> In short, is this not a case similar to underspecification?
>>>> Kind regards,
>>>> Øyvind Eide
>>>> Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
>>>> Unit for Digital Documentation, University of Oslo

More information about the Crm-sig mailing list