Pagina 26 - BCSV, XXXV, 2005

26 LEON POMPA
Locke’s theory of ideas is. For there remains this fundamental difference
between them: Locke’s theory is plainly meant to be a theory of thè na­
ture of concepts, whereas Vico’s is not; it is meant to be a theory about
a language appropriate to a non-conceptual mode of thought, and, as
such, needs to be treated in its own right. It is clear, however, that Vico’s
account of thè poetic origins of both language and ideas, underlies many
aspects of his account of thè life of poetic man and although it is not pos-
sible, within thè limits of thè present essay, to trace all these effects, in
what follows I shall discuss some of them in thè light of certain inter-
pretations that have been advanced, before discussing thè account di-
rectly.
5. In thè present case, that of thè poetic world, thè idea in question
is that which provides thè content of poetic man’s metaphysical con­
ception of thè world as a world of living gods, while thè language is thè
mute language of gestures, objects and hieroglyphics, which constitutes
thè appropriate way of thinking or expressing this idea. Both, as we have
seen, are said to be thè products of poetry. With regard to thè meta­
physical world this is partly because that world is thè result of a
metaphorical projection of poetic man’s idea of himself into thè physi-
cal world and partly because this involves giving sentience to thè inani­
mate, which Vico takes to be thè supreme achievement of poetry35. In
thè case of thè mute language of signs through which features of thè pro-
jected idea can be expressed communally, this is because it works large­
ly through imitative signs which have naturai rather than conventional
connections with this idea. Hence both can also be, as Vico describes
them, poetic characters, though this usage can be a source of confusion
in that one refers to thè character, i.e. characteristics, of an ideal being,
i.e. a god, and thè other to a certain kind of linguistic sign.
It is difficult to grasp thè full complexity of thè way in which Vico de-
velops thè idea of this first divine world, though many aspects of it have
been developed by Gianfranco Cantelli in his extremely thorough mono-
graph36. A striking feature of his reading is thè way in which he explains
why, for Vico at least, thè first language must be primarily visual, ges-
tural, and imitative and how, in turn, this is thè source of Vico’s claim
that a language of written characters is more appropriate to such a world
than an auditory language. It is noticeable, however, that Cantelli is more
concerned with describing this world than with asking whether or not it
35 Sn44, §§ 186, 404.
36 G . C antelli, Mente corpo linguaggio, cit., pp. 13-36.