Orme 1

Gregory J. Orme

Dr. Harrington

ENGL 7615, History and Theory of Rhetoric

15 November 2013

A Genealogy of Ekphrasis: Changing Views

Definitions

The word ekphrasis did not enter the standard English dictionary until the 18th century

(Heffernan, Representation). However, the practice goes back nearly to the beginning of writing.

In its most common definition, ekphrasis refers to the rhetorical exercise of describing a

work of visual art through words. The term derives from the Greek ek, meaning “out,” and

phrasis, meaning “speak,” creating the verb ekphrazein, or to call an inanimate object by name.

By this definition, ekphrasis originated in the progymnasmata, or preliminary student exercises,

as part of the formal training of orators in classical Greece. To quote Theon, ekphrasis was “an

expository speech which vividly brings the subject before our eyes” (Wall). Typical subjects

included the animate (people and animals), the inanimate (landscapes), events such as battles,

and the abstract (character and particular seasons) (Goldhill).

Only later did art become a topic, although over time it became the subject most closely

associated with ekphrasis. This strict sense was exemplified by works such as Walter Pater’s

illumination of Leonardo da Vinci’s portrait Mona Lisa, cited by Michael Levey in 1978 as

“probably still the most famous piece of writing about any picture in the world” (Levey).

Through the centuries, the uses and functions of ekphrasis have extended far beyond a

simple classification. In the exercise of ekphrasis, the subject could be completely imaginary (a

form called “notional ekphrasis”), as the intent was to cultivate habits of thinking and writing

Orme 2

rather than to craft a literal historical or legal document (De Armas). Irrespective of various

definitions, the properties of ancient ekphrasis are agreed upon generally as enargeia (vividness),

sapheneia (clarity), and phantasia (mental image), which together evoke an emotional response

(Zeitlin). Indeed, ekphrasis may be inseparable from enargeia and phantasia and, consequently,

from discussions of the psychology of influence (Goldhill).

Ekphrasis may be also conflated with memory, as points of argument could be visually

placed in a rhetor’s mental image. From the time of Gorgias (Encomium of Helen) on, vivid

images were crucial to memory and emotionally rich images were of particular importance in

this regard at least until printed sources became more available (Carruthers and Ziolkowski).

The practice of ekphrasis is not without risk. If not handled skillfully, it may seem to be

derivative or even pointless (Bruhn). If handled skillfully, it may open up the practitioner to

charges—as is the case with rhetoric in general—that it is being used for deception; that is, as

Simon Goldhill suggested, “as a way of getting past the censor of the intellect” (Goldhill).

One aspect that sets ekphrasis apart from routine description is the concept that one type

of art is being used to relate to another, defining its form and essence. Through effective

ekphrasis, the brilliance and vividness of the description allows the audience to comprehend the

original in an enhanced way, with one ideal being to produce in the audience members the same

feelings as one who may have actually seen the subject (Goldhill). A writer of prose or poetry, in

finding a way to relate more directly with the reader, develops a story about the subject that

becomes more than mere explanation—ekphrasis takes on a life of its own, a thought

summarized well by Plutarch when he noted, “Simonides calls painting silent poetry and poetry

painting that speaks.” More recently, Murray Krieger, in discussing the limitations and the

limitlessness of the genre, eloquently stated that “what is being described in ekphrasis is both a

Orme 3

miracle and a mirage…such as language alone can trace” (Krieger, Illusion). With such

assertions, he offered an oblique challenge to the conventional view proffered by Gotthold

Ephraim Lessing that the arts were separate and that each was inherently restricted (Lessing).

However, a broader definition of ekphrasis allows for it to encompass virtually all media

so that, to provide a few examples, a film may describe a painting, a painting may describe a

sculpture, or a sculpture may describe a book or one of its characters. Those scholars who

supported the Italian theory of the sister arts held that text, music, and visual arts could not only

present the same subject but also transmit a parallel moral and instructional value (Hagstrum). In

essence, then, the artist and the writer may seek and achieve the same effects through different

materials (Goldhill). Insofar as a rhetorical element is present, the broadness of the definition of

ekphrasis may be seen as depending ultimately on the broadness of one’s definition of art.

Historical Context

Ekphrasis is one of literature’s oldest and most-enduring practices (Cunningham). To the

art historian, it represents no less than the beginning of art history (Elsner, Art History).

Consequently, a reasoned understanding of the full definition of ekphrasis relies on knowledge of

both its ancient and contemporary meanings, as theory on the genre has had endured a “curious

and contentious history” (Barbetti).

Ryan Welsh accurately observed, “Few pieces of media jargon have as long a history or

as considerable an evolution as ekphrasis.” The definition has endured such radical change and

absorbed (and expunged) so many specialized meanings over the centuries that precise

understandings in context rely on specific knowledge of a period, with the standard dictionaries

being of little aid (Welsh). Peter Wagner asserted, “If critics agree at all about ekphrasis, they

stress the fact that it has been variously defined and variously used and that the definition

Orme 4

ultimately depends on the particular argument to be deployed” (Wagner). Even among

contemporary scholars, ekphrasis remains “a slippery topic” (Zeitlin). However, as numerous

researchers in the fields of literature, art history, and media have endeavored to construct an

accurate genealogy of ekphrasis, common threads and usages have become more apparent.

Homer. Historians largely cite ekphrasis as being the first recorded Western writing

about art. The earliest examples of the genre may be found among the ancient Greeks. Book 18

of Homer’s Iliad is widely recognized as containing the prototype of the ekphrastic tradition: a

vibrant depiction of the shield Hephaestus fashioned for Achilles. Contemporary dating of

Homer’s writing would put it near the time that writing originated in Greece, making ekphrasis

not just the earliest writing about art but also placing it among the earliest Western writings

about anything (Heffernan, Museum). Homer’s compelling description “constitutes the

touchstone for artistic admiration (and emulation) in word as in image” (Zeitlin). Homer’s

influential ekphrasis served as the inspiration for Hesiod in his description of the shield of

Heracles, for Virgil in his description of the shield of Aeneas, and for Nonnus in his description

of the shield of Dionysus.

Along with its antiquity and considerable influence, Homer’s piece is also noteworthy for

revealing how text offered possibilities that transcended the literal interpretations of sight,

meshing the verbal with the visual in a dramatic way by interlacing realistic characteristics (such

as materials and appearance) with fanciful ones (such as sound and motion) that the object could

not realistically possess. In so doing, he invited the imaginary object to become real in the mind

of the reader. These aspects became fundamental to delineating ekphrasis, which “occupies a

strange place between the realms of the visual and the linguistic” (Welsh).

Orme 5

Such incorporation of ekphrasis into larger texts may serve a variety of functions,

including the common allegorical and symbolic purposes. Frederick De Armas argued that

ekphrasis in a longer narrative could also be for “divinatory sign, enigmatic riddle, emotional

intensifier, mythic paradigm, or metatextual emblem of the work itself,” but, for readers who

grasped none of these legitimate purposes, could be viewed merely as “a contrived pause in the

narrative, an unnecessary and ornamental digression, or a self-indulgent showing-off in a display

of rhetorical skills” (De Armas). These contrasting views on the worth of description within

literature continue today, with fledgling authors being advised to “avoid any long descriptions

that slow down the pace” (Pickover).

Classical Greece and the Roman Empire. During the time of the classical Greek

philosophers, ekphrasis emerged as a tool of rhetoric—a skillful way to describe art and other

objects. Using rhetoric successfully was a means of demonstrating prowess as a scholar and

writer. Students learned how to use description to translate to a heretofore unknowing audience

the emotional experience embodied in a person, place, or object. Although descriptions were to

be rich in detail, the idea was not simply to have an eye for minutiae but to capture the qualities

that went beyond the physical (Welsh).

The great philosophers of the time employed ekphrastic concepts. In his Republic, Plato

discussed forms using everyday objects. As an analogy for ekphrasis, he used the example of a

bed and explored “bedness,” or each form a bed could take depending on how it was viewed.

Plato asked whether the intent of art is to represent things as they actually are or as they appear

to be. In another instance, Socrates discussed the periphery of the concept with Phaedrus,

comparing writing with painting and ultimately concluding that, even though paintings may be

lifelike, they remain silent, and even though words may be profound, they are unable to answer a

Orme 6

simple question. Quintilian employed the concept of phantasia to maintain that, through

enargeia in ekphrastic speech, skilled orators could reach the deepest emotions of their listeners.

This ability to make something visible was viewed as one of the most important weapons for

persuasion—a weapon that skilled rhetors could use to amplify or conceal facts (Goldhill).

Descriptions of the shield of Aeneas in Virgil’s Aeneid and the tapestries of Arachne and

Minerva in Ovid’s Metamorphoses remain among the most-cited examples of the genre among

the ancients. Although not using the term ekphrasis, Cicero (De Oratore), Quintilian (Institutio

Oratoria), and other notable philosophers and writers of the era pointedly addressed the power of

vivid speech. In ancient ekphrasis, the relationship between text and image was “complex and

interdependent, presenting sophisticated reflection on the conception and process of both verbal

and visual representation” (Francis).

It was not until the Second Sophistic in the first through the third centuries that ekphrasis

acquired its specialized sense of being an art that described art. Some scholars believe the works

of Philostratus of Lemnos represented the first such use of ekphrasis. Two pieces in particular—

Imagines, often ascribed to him, and the Tablet of Cebes—stand out as archetypes of the genre

(Doody). The latter is an interpretation of an allegorical image of a tablet containing all the

temptations of life symbolically represented; the former describes 64 paintings in a villa in

Naples, using these works as a springboard to explain the symbols and underlying meaning of art

to a group of young pupils.

The Middle Ages. Medieval ekphrasis is largely ignored and unstudied. Claire Barbetti

characterized the range of scholarship on the term as “beginning in ancient Greece, skipping to

the Renaissance and Enlightenment in Europe, to the present.” However, with a rekindling of

interest in the genre, some scholars have reinvestigated the era and made important arguments

Orme 7

about its place in the genealogy of ekphrasis. One of these theories is that ekphrasis in medieval

times took another major shift, emerging more as a process than a genre—a verb, not a noun—

while working to transform composition. Ekphrasis during this time was presented as a dream or

mystical vision (Barbetti).

A notable instance of ekphrastic writing may be found in one of the most important

literary works of the era, Dante’s Purgatorio, which is part of the Divine Comedy. In Canto X,

the poet provides lush descriptions of white marble sculptures cut into the side of the mountain

of Purgatory. These sculptures show Biblical and classical examples of humility and, through a

mystical exchange, convey a message to a bereaved mother (Corn).

Medieval ekphrasis highlighted the important connection between memory and the

practices and composing and translating. Far from being a footnote, ekphrasis in the Middle

Ages cracked opened a critical door that was destined to be passed through in later centuries

(Barbetti).

Renaissance and Reformation. During the Italian Renaissance, ekphrasis was

rediscovered. It became an important literary genre and moved well beyond being a rhetorical

exercise, becoming capacious both in subject and use and offering seemingly limitless possible

combinations. As an example of this expansion, visual artists began creating works founded on

notional ekphrasis—paintings based on descriptions of paintings that never existed.

In the prefatory essay to the collection Ekphrasis in the Age of Cervantes, Frederick

De Armas expounded on such a potential breadth for ekphrasis, stating it “can be allegorical,

emblematic, decorative, or veiled; and it can serve as a rhetorical or mnemonic device (or both).”

He reiterated that ekphrasis could be real or imaginary and suggested that it could be a

combination of the two, being transformative (by changing some elements), metadescriptive (by

Orme 8

basing the writing on a textual description of art that may be real or imaginary), or fragmented

(by using only parts of a work). In his view, ekphrasis could be either descriptive (by depicting

an object) or narrative (by telling a story based on the object) (De Armas).

Throughout this period, Western writers continued to use ekphrasis as part of longer

works. An example of such use is in Edmund Spenser’s The Faerie Queene (1590), when

Britomart visits Busyrane and views tapestries portraying the exploits of Jove. Miguel de

Cervantes employed ekphrasis in Don Quixote (1605) and other works. An archetypal example

of ekphrasis during this period is Canto 33 of Ludovico Ariosto’s epic poem Orlando Furioso

(1516), which includes the description of a picture gallery created by the enchanter Merlin. This

epic has been hailed as “one of the most influential works in the whole of European literature”

(Ariosto). William Shakespeare (The Rape of Lucrece), Calderón de la Barca (The Painter of his

Dishonor), Lope de Vega, and other renowned writers introduced ekphrasis to plays. Despite

these notable examples, the frequency of ekphrastic writing was far from uniform across

languages and countries.

The Protestant Reformation (1517–1648) and the Roman Catholic response initiated by

the Council of Trent obliged writers to employ ekphrasis circumspectly. Iconoclastic religious

leaders raised concerns about the creation of powerful images even as, contradictorily, they

embraced the potential for ekphrasis to turn minds toward the soul and away from idols (Luxon).

Romanticism and Modern Times. By the end of the 18th century, a significant

development grew from an increasingly literate public in the West, who, lacking accurate visual

reproductions of art, sparked a burgeoning demand for vivid description of these works. British

writers such as William Hazlitt, Walter Pater, and John Ruskin produced works of ekphrasis

about both ancient and modern art.

Orme 9

Unlike their predecessors (and successors), the fact that the art existed was critical to

these writers, although the ultimate goal was still to evoke emotion in the reader. In poetry, too,

the large majority of ekphrastic writing involved the real rather than the imaginary. Another

evolution during this period involved the proportional weight of ekphrastic writing to the whole

work. In epic poems, such as Homer’s Iliad, the ekphrasis was a pause in the proceedings.

However, after John Milton, the epic became rare in the West; ekphrasis became restricted

almost entirely to shorter poems where, rather than being a diversion, it became more central.

Romantic poets tended to include lengthy musings about the visual arts and, therefore,

ekphrastic techniques were regularly employed (Corn). Notable works include Percy Bysshe

Shelley’s “On the Medusa of Leonardo Da Vinci in the Florentine Gallery” and Robert

Browning’s “My Last Duchess.” However, the era’s most famous example of ekphrastic poetry

is probably John Keats’s “Ode on a Grecian Urn.” Keats, like Homer and others, melded intricate

realism with the impossible; however, unlike his predecessors, Keats included his own

experience in viewing the urn as an essential part of the poem. This shift in emphasis represents

another significant transformation in the genre, as from this point on, the perspective of a viewer

—such as the writer or the audience—is often included in the description (Munsterberg). So

completely was the paradigm changed that current scholarship now recognizes, almost

unquestioningly, that “the culture of viewing and the culture of display are mutually implicative

and supportive” (Goldhill). Paralleling this change, scholars began to formally recognize that,

unlike the visual arts that are in themselves visual, the verbal arts require a significant investment

by the receiver to approximate sensory perception (Scarry).

Ekphrasis also found new importance when applied within the modern realist novel.

Detailed descriptions of modern gadgets and machinery, as well as the sights of the city and

Orme 10

factory, became essential to modern realism (Wall). In Victorian fiction, a character’s feelings

and unspoken histories are often translated through intricate descriptions of the physical

(Freedgood).

In the 20th century, ekphrastic writers rejected the ancients’ obsession with the lengthy

and elaborate, instead focusing on stripped-down forms of description to generate a sense of

visual immediacy. In modern times, the ability to accurately reproduce visual art reduced the

need for ekphrasis as a replacement for images; however, ekphrastic writing was still widely

employed as an accompaniment to visuals, serving as a quiet expert guide to the reader. In this

way, ekphrasis served “to educate and direct viewing as a social and intellectual process”

(Goldhill).

Evolution and Current Thought

Despite shifts of meaning and arguments regarding perspectives, the relationship—or,

perhaps, struggle—between the visual and the verbal remains central to the concept of ekphrasis

(Welsh). In speaking of ekphrasis, James Heffernan perfectly expresses that it “celebrates the

power of the silent image even as it tries to circumscribe that power with the authority of the

word” (Heffernan, Museum).

Some scholars, such as Ruth Webb, have contended that there should be a clear division

between ancient and modern definitions of ekphrasis, with the latter being restricted to

descriptions of artistic works (Webb). Others argue that that the ancients “would have recognized

the description of art as a paradigmatic example of ekphrasis with a significance relatively close

to modern usage” (Elsner, Genres).

In one evolved view of ekphrasis, the work of art may not even be described; rather, there

is simply a reference to an artist or work, or even to a feature that may represent the work. In

Orme 11

such cases, ekphrasis exists “only in the mind of the reader/spectator who can view the work in

his/her memory and imagination” (De Armas).

Although ekphrasis had a clear practical function when images were largely unavailable,

the advancement of technology provided the ability to present visuals more accurately,

suggesting that ekphrasis was at risk of being relegated to the trash bin of dead arts. On the

contrary—and ironically, possibly because of the increase in imagery and the increasingly

complex interplay between word and image—the study of ekphrasis has enjoyed yet another

revival over the past quarter century (Loizeaux). As one prominent scholar noted, “It would not

be hyperbole to suggest that no other rhetorical term has aroused such interest in recent years

among classicists and nonclassicists alike” (Zeitlin). These scholars have engaged in outlining

the formal elements that help define ekphrasis and, more significantly, have analyzed the

interrelationship between ekphrasis and surrounding narratives, introducing terms such as

“focalization,” “framing,” and “proleptic signification” into the academic discussion (Goldhill).

Heffernan credited Murray Krieger’s 1967 essay, “Ekphrasis and the Still Movement of

Poetry; or Laokoön Revisited,” as being the single most important work in the resurrection of

ekphrasis in scholarly circles (Heffernan, Representation). The chief significance of that essay

lies in its compelling argument to view ekphrasis not as a mere subgenre of literature but as a

literary principle (Krieger, Still Movement). This change of perspective, Heffernan argues, gave

ekphrasis no less than a “new lease on life” (Heffernan, Representation).

Debate continues about what should be considered ekphrasis, with scholars typically

arguing from their own, sometimes rather narrow perspectives. Wagner has contended that

ekphrasis “originates in the field of rhetoric and has been appropriated by literary critics and art

historians,” suggesting that we drop “the tacit assumption that the verbal representation of an

Orme 12

image must be ‘literary’ to qualify as ekphrasis” (Wagner). Many current scholars accept

Heffernan’s concise concept of ekphrasis being simply “the verbal representation of visual

representation” (Heffernan, Museum). If such is the case, then scholars are obliged to accept all

writing concerning images as ekphrasis.

Additional distinctions in the definition of ekphrasis are continuing to be suggested

(Welsh). The term is expanding to include more disciplines, spurring an increasing interest in

how ekphrasis, an ancient term, can be a part of a 21st-century understanding (Wagner). For

example, as cognitive science has increasingly researched imagery across human senses, the

neurological and psychological underpinnings of ekphrasis are being revealed and becoming

better understood (Starr). Also, the prominence of images in 21st-century media and the

recognition that so many contemporary poets have turned to the visual arts as subjects for their

work has compelled some scholars to consider the social dimensions of ekphrasis (Loizeaux).

Argument and Conclusion

As has seemingly always been the case, perspectives on ekphrasis have considerably

more to do with the ideals of a particular society than with any rigid, universal, or enduring

definition of the term; ekphrastic artifacts tell us more about the values of the culture that

developed them than about ekphrasis itself. Moreover, it is not rare to find that scholars and

critics write about ekphrasis—and even employ ekphrastic writing—without ever acknowledging

the term. For these two reasons alone, it should come as small surprise that “in the aviary of

contemporary critical discourse, ekphrasis is an old and yet surprisingly unfamiliar bird”

(Heffernan, Representation).

Now, with ekphrasis becoming a renewed subject for contemporary scholars, it is

reasonable to ask the purpose of this scholarship and to clarify, perhaps reimagine, what

Orme 13

ekphrasis means today. Scholars continue to debate if ekphrasis is simply an elementary exercise

in description, a broadly inclusive topos for the agon between text and visual, or even an ancient

link to conjecture on the intricacies of representation and the psychology of reception (Jarratt).

Signs are pointing to literary ekphrasis, for centuries a narrowly defined term, again

encompassing more than just the visual arts. Likewise, ekphrasis in general has taken on a

greater significance and could be argued as being vital to understanding contemporary

interchange among a broad spectrum of media. Ekphrasis is being defined by those in the digital

age on their own terms. Web sites and blogs such as Digital Ekphrasis investigate the

relationship between words and images, concentrating on how digital technology forms,

transforms, and reconfigures literary representation (Lindhé). In our world, the concept of the

arts as separate—if it ever were true—has melted: words become videos, books become art,

people become avatars.

If we allow ourselves to escape the tiny box within which some scholars have placed

ekphrasis, we may see that its potential subjects are not limited to shields or urns and that its

potential power goes far beyond that of an orator’s trick. We can envision that art in any form is

a commentary on life, and that life—in particular, our social interactions—is in itself a type of

art. As talented writers long ago knew, description was just a way into the mind and persuasion

has always been a negotiation between the rhetor and the audience. When an audience is allowed

to construct the missing pieces of what is being told or shown, they are, in effect, helping to

make the argument for the rhetor, using their own past experiences not just to think, but also to

feel, ultimately embracing an argument as if it were their own.

Our contemporary understanding of ekphrasis must wholly allow its ancient rhetorical

past, its dynamic evolution, and its expanding future. By whatever name we call it, ekphrastic

Orme 14

language has shown over millennia that it can penetrate the emotions and influence people.

Therefore, ekphrasis will continue to be a source of transformative force to those who use it and

will remain a topic of perennial interest to scholars. Ekphrasis is not just an exercise—it is no

less than “the closing of the gap between experience and art” (Barbetti).

Orme 15

Works Cited

Barbetti, Claire. Ekphrastic Medieval Visions: A New Discussion in Interarts Theory.

New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011. Electronic.

Bruhn, Siglind. Musical Ekphrasis: Composers Responding to Poetry and Painting.

Pendragon Press: Hillsdale, NY, 2000. Electronic.

Carruthers, Mary and Jan M. Ziolkowski, The Medieval Craft of Memory: An Anthology

of Texts and Pictures. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2003. Print.

Corn, Alfred. Notes on Ekphrasis. 2008. Electronic. 3 November 2013.

Cunningham, Valentine. "Why Ekphrasis?" Classical Philology (2007): 57–71.

Electronic.

De Armas, Frederick A., ed. Ekphrasis in the Age of Cervantes. Lewisburg, PA: Bucknell

University Press, 2005. Electronic.

Doody, Margaret Anne. The True Story of the Novel. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers

University Press, 1997. Electronic.

Elsner, Jaś. “Art History as Ekphrasis.” Art History (2010): 10–27. Electronic.

—. “The Genres of Ekphrasis.” Ramus (2002): 1–18. Electronic.

Francis, James. “Metal Maidens, Achilles’ Shield, and Pandora: The Beginnings of

Ekphrasis.” American Journal of Public Health (2009): 1–23. Electronic.

Freedgood, Elaine. The Ideas in Things: Fugitive Meaning in the Victorian Novel.

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago , 2010. Print.

Goldhill, Simon. “What Is Ekphrasis For?” Classical Philology (2007): 1–19. Electronic.

Hagstrum, Jean H. The Sister Arts: The Tradition of Literary Pictorialism and English

Poetry from Dryden to Gray. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1987. Electronic.

Orme 16

Heffernan, James. “Ekphrasis and Representation.” New Literary History (1991):

297–316. Electronic.

—. Museum of Words: The Poetics of Ekphrasis from Homer to Ashbery. Chicago, IL:

University of Chicago Press, 2004. Print.

Jarratt, Susan C. “Ekphrasis, Imagination and Persuasion in Ancient Rhetorical Theory

and Practice.” Rhetorica (2011): 113–115, 119. Electronic.

Krieger, Murray. “Ekphrasis and the Still Movement of Poetry; or Laokoön Revisited.”

Ekphrasis. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1967. 263–88. Electronic.

—. Ekphrasis: The Illusion of the Natural Sign. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins

University Press, 1992. Electronic.

Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim. Laocoön: An Essay on the Limits of Painting and Poetry.

Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1984. Electronic.

Levey, Michael. The Case of Walter Pater. London: Thames and Hudson, 1978. Print.

Lindhé, Cecilia. “About Digital Ekphrasis.” n.d. Digital Ekphrasis. Electronic.

4 November 2013.

Loizeaux, Elizabeth Bergmann. Twentieth-Century Poetry and the Visual Arts.

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Electronic.

Luxon, Thomas H. “Iconoclasm and Poetry in the English Reformation: Down Went

Dagon.” Huntington Library Quarterly (1988): 235–238. Electronic.

Munsterberg, Marjorie. Writing About Art. New York, NY: CreateSpace Independent

Publishing Platform, 2009. Electronic.

Pickover, Clifford A. How to Create an Instant Bestselling Novel. n.d. Electronic.

11 November 2013. <http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/pickover../bestseller.html>.

Orme 17

Scarry, Elaine. Dreaming by the Book. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999.

Electronic.

Starr, G. Gabrielle . “Multisensory Imagery.” The Johns Hopkins Handbook of Cognitive

Cultural Studies. Ed. Lisa Zunshine. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2010.

Electronic.

Wagner, Peter. “Introduction: Ekphrasis, Iconotexts, and Intermediality.” Icons - Texts -

Iconotexts: Essays on Ekphrasis and Intermediality. Ed. Peter Wagner. Berlin: Walter De

Gruyter, 1996. Print.

Wall, Cynthia Sundberg. The Prose of Things: Transformations of Description in the

Eighteenth Century. Chicago, IL: University Of Chicago Press, 2006. Print.

Webb, Ruth. “Ekphrasis Ancient and Modern: The Invention of a Genre.” Word and

Image (1999): 7–18. Electronic.

Welsh, Ryan. “Ekphrasis.” 2007. The University of Chicago. Electronic. 11 November

2013.

Zeitlin, Froma I. “Figure: Ekphrasis.” Greece and Rome (2013): 17–31. Electronic.