Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta Recepción. Mostrar todas las entradas
Mostrando entradas con la etiqueta Recepción. Mostrar todas las entradas

sábado, 24 de agosto de 2024

Creative Writing and Storyworld Possible Selves

Artículo de New Writing, sobre narratología y lectura de la ficción, en el que me citan.

Martínez, M. Ángeles. (U Complutense de Madrid ma.martinez@filol.ucm.es)."Creative Writing and Storyworld Possible Selves." New Writing: The International Journal for the Practice and Theory of Creative Writing 21.4 (22 Aug. 2024): 1-19.*

         https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14790726.2024.2377538

         https://doi.org/10.1080/14790726.2024.2377538

2024

 

—y lo citado es este artículo mío:

 

_____. "Overhearing Narrative." iPaper at Academia.edu 30 June 2011.*

         https://www.academia.edu/705948/

         2015



—oOo—

sábado, 3 de abril de 2021

El espectador real: Siendo leídos

 

En su Teoría de los sentimientos morales habla Adam Smith de cómo en la comunicación pública el espectador virtual que emana de nuestro discurso puede no coincidir con los receptores reales de dicho discurso. Y ve Smith en esa no coincidencia ciertas virtudes educativas, no en este caso para el receptor, sino para el autor o emisor. Estas observaciones de Smith pueden ponerse en relación con las teorías estructuralistas de la comunicación que distinguen entre el lector o receptor implícito y el receptor real, especialmente a la hora de adaptar estos conceptos a un entorno comunicativo en red que combina la idealización inherente a la comunicación escrita en la presentación del sujeto, por una parte, y la inmediatez interactiva de la conversación, por otra.

 Texto completo:

El espectador real: Siendo leídos

https://ssrn.com/abstract=3758595

Ibercampus (Feb. 8, 2011)

7 Pages Posted: 3 Mar 2021 Last revised: 4 Mar 2021

Jose Angel Garcia Landa

Universidad de Zaragoza

Date Written: January 2, 2011


English abstract:

The Real Spectator: Being Read

In his 'Theory of Moral Sentiments' Adam Smith notes how in public communication the virtual spectator emanating from our discourse may not coincide with the actual receivers of the said discourse. Smith perceives an educational potential in this non-coincidence, not, as it happens, for the receiver, but for the sender or author. These insights of Smith's may be usefully correlated to structuralist theories of communication which distinguish between the implied reader or receiver and the real reader, and they may be especially helpful when it comes to adapting these concepts to a networked communicational environment which combines the idealization in the subject's presentation of self which is inherent to written communication, on the one hand, with the interactional immediacy of conversation, on the other.


Keywords: Communication, Sender, Semiotics, Receiver, Computer-Mediated Communication, Blogs, Self, Interaction, Discourse

Garcia Landa, Jose Angel, The Real Spectator: Being Read (El espectador real: Siendo leídos) (January 2, 2011). Ibercampus (Feb. 8, 2011), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3758595

 

 


 

 

También en:

eJournal Classifications
CSN Subject Matter eJournals
            

CSN Subject Matter eJournals
            

CommRN Subject Matter eJournals
            

LingRN Subject Matter eJournals
            

LingRN Subject Matter eJournals
            

LingRN Subject Matter eJournals
            

RCRN Subject Matter eJournals
            

RCRN Subject Matter eJournals
            

 

 

 

_____. "El espectador real." In García Landa, Vanity Fea 2 Jan. 2011.*

         http://vanityfea.blogspot.com/2011/01/el-espectador-real.html

         2011

_____. "El espectador real: Siendo leídos." Ibercampus (Vanity Fea) 8 Feb. 2011.*

         http://www.ibercampus.es/articulos.asp?idarticulo=14520

         2013

_____. "El espectador real: Siendo leídos." Academia 5 Jan. 2021.* https://www.academia.edu/44838955/

         2021

_____. "El espectador real: Siendo leídos." ResearchGate 14 Jan. 2021.*

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348454630

         2021

_____. "El espectador real: Siendo leídos." Humanities Commons 23 Jan. 2021.*

         https://hcommons.org/deposits/item/hc:34201/

         2021

_____. "El espectador real: Siendo leídos." SSRN 4 March 2021.*

         https://ssrn.com/abstract=3758595

         2021

         History & Philosophy of Communication eJournal 4 March 2021.*

         https://www.ssrn.com/link/History-Philosophy-Communication.html

         2021

         Sociolinguistics & Variation eJournal 4 March 2021.*

         https://www.ssrn.com/link/Sociolinguistics-Variation.html

         2021

         Applied Linguistics eJournal 4 March 2021.*

         https://www.ssrn.com/link/Applied-Linguistics.html

         2021

         Discourse Analysis (LingRes Network) 4 March 2021.*

         https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/JELJOUR_Results.cfm?form_name=journalBrowse&journal_id=3467285

         2021

         Semantics eJournal 4 March 2021.*

         https://www.ssrn.com/link/Semantics.html

         2021

         Rhetorical Theory eJournal 4 March 2021.*

         https://www.ssrn.com/link/Rhetorical-Theory.html

         2021

         Writing Technologies eJournal 4 March 2021.*

         https://www.ssrn.com/link/Writing-Technologies.html

         2021

 

 

—oOo—

lunes, 19 de febrero de 2018

Retropost #2016 (19 de febrero de 2008): Múltiples lectores implícitos



A photo on Flickr



El lector implícito es un concepto que normalmente se atribuye a Wolfgang Iser, que escribió un libro con ese título (Der Implizite Leser, 1974), pero que en realidad puede tener una historia más antigua. Mucho tiene que decir al respecto por ejemplo la Rhetoric of Fiction de Wayne Booth (1961), que además de teorizar al autor implícito, también le busca un correlato implícito, aunque lo llama "mock reader" o lector de pega. Igual que Walker Gibson, que escribió un artículo interesantísimo sobre el tema ("Authors, Speakers, Readers, and Mock Readers") ya en 1950.

El autor implícito es un concepto al que muchos le han cogido manía: entre los que no aceptan ningún tipo de autor(idad) en el texto, los que la remiten al lector y los que rechazan las preocupaciones éticas de Booth etc... resulta que el autor implícito tiene hoy mala prensa, cuando no es declarado inexistente. Y sin embargo podríamos hablar de múltiples autores implícitos (uno al gusto de cada lector) con lo cual el concepto proliferaría en lugar de desaparecer.

El lector implícito tiene mejor prensa que ese "fantasma" del autor implícito, aunque también muestra esa tendencia a disolverse o a multiplicarse o a volverse borroso. Acabo de leerme un artículo de Brian Richardson que trata esta cuestión de los textos que exhiben una diversidad o superposición de lectores implícitos ("Singular Text, Multiple Implied Readers", Style 41.3, otoño 2007), y presenta muchos casos interesantes así como una propuesta de clasificación.

Se encuentra el caso claro de textos para niños que sin embargo incluyen elementos que sólo pueden ser entendidos por adultos que lean con el niño. Andersen expresaba su intención de dirigirse a los dos grupos de lectores simultáneamente, con lo cual se puede definir un lector implícito "niño" y otro "adulto".

La misma multiplicidad de receptores se da en otros medios como las películas infantiles y los dibujos animados. A veces de hecho es difïcil distinguir qué elementos se presupone deberían ser captados por los niños y cuáles no. Los niños se ríen con Shrek o con los Simpson de maneras que a veces suponemos están reservadas a los adultos. Y un niño es en todo caso un ser difuso que se va metamorfoseando en adulto. Quizá sólo tenga sentido hablar de un doble receptor implícito en aquellos casos en los que la diferencia está claramente perfilada.

Otro caso claro de doble receptor son los textos con un mensaje político, erótico, etc. oculto y secreto menos para quien disponga de determinadas claves de lectura. (Por ejemplo en algunos acrósticos). Y los autores pertenecientes a minorías étnicas, culturales, sexuales, etc. a veces incluyen tanto una alocución más neutra dirigida al público mayoritario o "general" como guiños o alusiones que sólo adquieren sentido para un receptor implícito que pertenezca a un círculo más particular.

En realidad, se me ocurre, muchas veces es la dialéctica de la lectura la que permite descubrir claves de este estilo: alusiones privadas, asociaciones particulares, repeticiones recurrentes etc., que van volviéndose "legibles" o cargándose de sentido conforme conocemos mejor la obra de un autor. Así, en las obras de Nabokov podemos reconocer elementos recurrentes de una a otra a lo largo de los años, elementos que no pertenecen al esquema comunicativo de una obra aislada (al "lector implícito" de esa obra) porque hace falta una clave más panorámica para poderlos leer. Aparece así una lectura personal o privada superpuesta a la lectura pública de las obras. Lo mismo sucede para los lectores que conozcan la biografía del autor: la obra adquiere un sentido distinto. ¿Cuántos lectores, por ejemplo, del cuento de Nabokov ’Escenas de la vida de un monstruo doble" relacionan este relato con la muerte del hermano de Nabokov, Sergei? Sin embargo, ése es el sentido que emerge para un lector "privado". ¿Lector implícito? En cierto modo: pero presente de modo más tenue que el lector implícito más público y más generalmente comunicado.

Señala Brian Richardson que en los casos en que identificamos una diversidad de lectores, suele establecerse una jerarquía entre ellos: uno de los lectores debe comprender lo mismo que el otro, y además, más cosas que el otro no comprende (por ejemplo, el adulto y el niño, o el lector 'neutro' heterosexual y el lector homosexual 'que entiende'—que entiende lo que el otro, y más). También observa que Umberto Eco narra cómo nuestro lector crítico disfruta de una victoria lectora o perspectiva irónica sobre los lectores que entienden menos... Pero en otros casos no hay jerarquía clara, y hay efectos de alocución confusos o no claramente determinables.

De hecho amenaza con difuminarse el lector implícito en obras difíciles o de lectura múltiple o ambigua (el Ulises por ejemplo) y más si sumamos otra circunstancia antes mencionada con respecto al autor implícito: que al ser el lector implícito una construcción interpretativa, quizá cada lector o cada crítico lo construya un tanto a su manera; nos las hemos de ver con un concepto inherentemente difuso puesto que tiene que ver con la interacción comunicativa entre varios lectores. Estaríamos así apuntando a una concepción comunicativo-interaccional, y no tanto formalista-estructural, de los conceptos de autor y lector implícito.

Señala Richardson que los conceptos bajtinianos de heteroglosia y polifonía son ya de por sí muy capaces para contener muchas de las voces que los autores emplean en los textos, sin tener que postular un nuevo lector implícito para cada cambio de voz o registro; es mejor dosificar el uso del término para evitar que pierda todo sentido.

Y sin embargo... son tantas las circunstancias que multiplican o difuminan la imagen del receptor. Otra más apunta Richardson: los textos que se releen o las películas que se ven dos veces. Muchas veces hay claves preestructuradas para ser captadas sólo por el relector, o por el espectador que ya conoce el final; de otro modo hay detalles no ya insignificantes sino que incluso imperceptibles pueden ser.

Aunque el esquema final del artículo de Richardson es poco claro, propone establecer un espectro o jerarquía posible de estos efectos de alocución múltiple. Lo adapto aquí a mi aire a una lista que va de mayor a menor definición de la imagen del lector implícito:

- Lector implícito único (y bien definido, se entiende)
- Lector implícito doble pero con una jerarquía clara (de ironía, conocimiento, etc.)
- Lector implícito doble (triple, múltiple, etc.) pero sin jerarquización clara de autoridad intelectual.
- Lectores implícitos múltiples (a veces es el caso también, y resultado, de un texto con múltiples autores implícitos...)
- Autor implícito como constructor de un texto generativo o combinatorio (hipertextos, textos experimentales) que dan lugar a una obra efectiva distinta o lectura diferente con cada intervención de lector.

Son casos interesantes, y en muchos casos se puede sin duda ascribir un texto a uno u otro tipo, sin muchas discusiones. Y sin embargo, también se podrían problematizar los límites y presuposiciones de esta clasificación, siempre; pues al ser el lector implícito un efecto de la interpretación, una construcción efectuada interactivamente por diversos sujetos (el autor y diversos lectores), siempre se presta a una negociación o redefinición. Hasta el texto más claro puede leerse en contextos muy distintos, y con fines muy distintos, y esto puede llegar a alterar la estructura de su alocución. O a alterar la manera en que comprendemos o conceptualizamos esa estructura alocutiva, lo cual viene a ser lo mismo.



Dishonest reading


—oOo—

lunes, 27 de julio de 2015

The Reader's Construction of Narrative

Notes taken c. 1985 from Horst Ruthrof's book The Reader's Construction of Narrative (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1981).

Preface

Phenomenology and structuralism converge in the study of "the activity of reading", with some exceptions.
viii- "... narrative surface texts are sets of signs coding at the same time two ontologically different sets of signifieds: presentational process and presented world"; "... unlike pragmatic discourse where modality is either available as a set of non-linguistic signs or is defined as stable by a pragmatic horizon of expectations (as in the case of technical instructions, sceintific reports, legal documents, etc.) fictive narrative modality is a set of signifieds which must be constructed by the reader through, prior to, or apart from the presented world. As a complex semantic unit it interacts dynamically with the presented world in the reading consciousness at each point of the forward reading process. This semantic interaction replaces both the relation between propositional content and illocutionary force (Austin, Searle) and the conception of style and tone as an adjunct to action sequence" (i.e. Todorov).
xi- Style vs. tone: "Tone (...) must be constructed by the reader (a) as a speaker's attitude pertaining to presentational speech acts and (be) as attitudes pertaining to presented speech acts" (It is not a surface structure);  "... the only kind of identification possible between actual reader and work is his construction of the implied reader, adequate and inadequate, and not between reader and fictive personae."


Chapter 1: What happens when we read a narrative text?

Texts are ontologically non-homogeneous—they exist at the same time at different levels of ideality. The interpretation of the world through stock-of-knowledge-at-hand is duplicated when we read a text.
4- "This means that we must be able to grasp the aspects of space, time, acts, personae, etc., and the ideological position of both the presented items and the presentational speech act." The typological approach is insufficient. There is not always a clear "point of view" (space and time). (A table comparing features of time, space, personae, acts, events, tonal aspects, atmosphereic aspects, ideological patterns, applied to both presentational process (+ reader) and presented world).
Events:
presentational process: "author's arrangements beyond the narrator's control"
presnted world: "non-human events"
Ideological patterns: only those of narrator, not of author.
Double vision in narrative:
6- "On the one hand, the vision of what could be seen, heard, imagined, or, in terms of the filmic medium, what could be projected and enacted on the screen; and, on the other, that vision which allows the former to come into existence, the quasi-reality of the presentational process." In poetry they are often mixed.
6- "Narrative, no matter which side is emphasized, lives from the distinction and interplay between presentational process and presented world." The stream of consciousness of the characters is not a presentational process, but presented world.
Four types of narrative statements:
"a) Process statements with reference to presented world
b) 'World' statements with reference to process
c) Process statements without reference to presented world (pure process markers)
d) 'World' statements without specific reference to process but always allowing its construction." (Note the difference between c & d - JAGL)
Verbal narrative constructs images just as non-verbal (iconcic) narrative constructs a text.
The right division is transmission & world, not teller & tale. (A partial coincidence).
Against van Dijk: narrative is not always linked (cf. Beckett - JAGL).
11- "Fowler's scheme

SENTENCE
PROSE FICTION
surface structure
text
modality
discourse
proposition
content

should be replaced by the following arrangement (...)


Text (as physical phenomenon)

Surface
Text (as linguistic code)


Transformation I

Deep structure 1
Presentational process (discourse)
Presented world (content)

Transformation II

Deep structure 2
Ideology of process
Ideology of world

Transformation III

Deep structure 3
Overall aesthetic-ideological meaning"


'Content' is an ambiguous term: it may refer to the presented world, or to an ideological abstraction. It is best dropped.
Two kinds of transformation (when reading):
- Propositional meaning (reductive transformation)
- Concretizing (expansive transformation) interpretation in terms of social codes. (No speech act theory in Ruthrof- JAGL).
Genesis and The Magic Poker: Examples of construction through reading of presentational process and presented world. Jakobson's metaphoric and metonymic poles of language:
21- "When we introduce the disctinction to the discussion of narrative structure, we not that both presentative process and presented world can be treated in a predominantly metonymic or predominantly metaphoric manner."
20- In Coover's metafiction, a "polyphonic treatment of presentational process and presented world." In metafiction both are metaphoric at the expense of their metonymic potential. On the other pole we find texts which foreground the presented world (metonymical texts).




2. Presentational Process and 'Narrative Transgression'

Is the novel dead? No: Simply the causal plot is dead. Formalists and Aristotle: the plot is not causality, but artistic arrangement. Barthes: notion of narrative vs. narrative transgression. But NO: The presence of the communicative act is essential, and so are its interactions with the message.

Van Dijk: "Artificial narrative dose not respect the pragmatic conditions of natural narrative" ("Action, Action Description, and Narrative" New Literary History 6 (1975): 291); "One of the charcacteristic pragmatic (or perhaps pragmatic-semantic) properties of artificial narration is that the narrator is not obliged to tell the truth" ("Philosophy of Action and Theory of Narratives", Poetics 5 (1976): 323 ff.).

This is fruitful for linguisics, but trivial for poetics. In literary narrative, the apparatus of telling becomes aesthetically relevant and interactive:
24- "Pragmatic constraints are largely replaced by aesthetic-artistic ones."

Discourse is not analogous to a sentence (vs. Barthes). The "teller" and the "tale" of Scholes and Kellogg refer to a vague level: author? narrator? Ruthrof's theory of phenomenological levels in literary narrative (similar to Ingarden):

1. Print / Sound
2. Linguistic formation.
3.1. Presented world
3.2. Presentational process        (3.1 and 3.2 are separate ontological realms)
3.3. Implied reader
3. Work ideology

26- "Each realm (or system) displays the general aspects of space, time, personae, acts, events, tonal & atmospheric qualities, and ideology, in a distinct manner" (shown in a table. There follow examples of foregrounding of one or the other level).

Erich Kahler's "inward turn of narrative", from cosmogony, to action, to psychology. The evolution of the ontological realm could also be traced.


3. Narrative language

The Concrete Datum

Narrative (as form) vs. narrative mode (the professional mode of presentation in narratives). We can speak of a mode in narrative "if the processes of telling and that which is told are predominant interacting features." "In this sense the 'novel merely heightens, isolates, and analyses the narrative motions of human consciousness'" (B. Hardy). But so do also all other narrative forms.
Relationship linguists / literary scholars: largely fruitless. But linguistics is necessary.

A useful distinction in Jakobson between the sender's and the receiver's construction of meaning (they follow inverted, opposed ways). Separate stages can be studied: creative process (a psychological study), text, and imagined world, "a synthesis of the schematically signified world and the reader's creative contribution" (37).  Linguistics, we understand, is dealing with the string of words as an "exchange of utterances", while literary studies are concerned mainly with language as it gives rise to the reader's construction of imaginary worlds and their moral-philosophical stance. Psychology also studies the reader's response. In criticism "it is not the schematically signified but the concretized worlds which are in conflict" (38), in Ingarden's terms. Poetics is not a part of linguistics: "works of literature reveal themselves to be stratified constructs with language as their indispensable skeleton" (39). Concretization, Ruthrof argues, ought to be banned from literary studies. [In arguing that works are not linear, Ruthrof seems to be implying that texts are linear]. Poetics and linguistics are overlapping but exclusive areas. Lodge's contention that "the fictional world of a novel is a verbal world" is mistaken, it "rests on the assumption that consciousness is essentially conceptual, i.e. verbal", but it isn't; our consciousness of everything in the novel is verbal, but its nature is not verbal." [I disagree here- language and consciousness are more closely involved—JAGL] And although we may verbalize our findings we are rarely able to discover specific concrete evidence in the text for such large-scale inferences" Lodge disregards reading. Textural (surface structure) vs. structural approach (which includes surface and deep structure, narrator, time structure, etc.). Narrative language is not distinctive from everyday language in a novel.

Narrative language as a structure of signs
42- "Being dynamic, the process of reading cannot really be represented as the object of an investigation." The reader uses all his total stock of knowledge in reading.
43- "It is this synthesis which places narrative in a metaphoric relationship with everyday life." Studying language as a structure of signs, we neglect unconscious response; the cumulative process in which signs are modified by the text previously read and by attitudes. An example with four levels: surface text, presentational process ("presentational process as suggestive of concretized process"), presented world ("presented world as suggestive of concretized world"), and inferences (high level inferences: interepretative abstractions and work ideology—(separation between both is not too clear, JAGL).

47- "When we are talking about stated ideas, we are dealing with the one area of a literary work in which the text functions as a verbal construct in its own right. By stated ideas I mean directly presented statements (made by the narrator or presented as a persona's mental or speech act) apparently serving as interpretive guides." Interpretative abstractions are provided by the reader; ideology is not wholly objective and not wholly subjective.


4. Narrative stratification and the dialectic of reading

Cf. Roman Ingarden's The Literary Work of Art. His stratification of the narrative work (sounds, linguistic meaning, schematic aspects through which the objects appear, objects). The last two must be modified: differentiation of traits between presentational process and presented world, with a foregrounding of either.

52- "In other words, the narrative text determines the sequence of concretization; the reader cannot concretize process and world simultaneously." A further stratum, philosophical-ideological, must be stipulated—not only abstracted, transformed by summary, but also directly provided by the surface text.

The text is perceived in a reading process, but is experienced retrospectively as a whole at the end.

53- According to Ingarden, "the statements in literary works are quasi-propositions". The pragmatic response to artistic objects is undermined by the integration of presentational process and presented world in narrative texts, in a polyphony. The work is not to be confused with its concretizations (Ingarden)—this is acceptable if concretization is understood as a transformation of the surface text. There are lacunae of indeterminacy in the work, as opposed to concretization. Concretizations may, then, differ.

57- "As we read the text, the schematic guiding system comes into existence, allowing and urging our concretizations to take shape." "According to Husserl such codified schemata permit the reconstruction of meaning intention "but only approximately in literature", actually "not unlike the social interaction." Examples, etc.

58- "One aspect, vital to our grasp of the kind of presentational process employed, concerns the speaker's very activity of speaking: whether he is mainly discussing, debating, confessing, adoring, imploring, praying, attacking or narrating. Any of these activities may of course be modified by any one or more of the others; which of these is predominant and structure-carrying, though, can be secured only in retrospect, i.e., with the whole text at our disposal" [Cf. van Dijk's 'macro-speech acts' - JAGL].

Two manners of reading are required for the presentational process and for the presented world—sometimes in a single word. There are two fundamentally different modalities, that of the presentational process and that of the author as sender of the total message. The latter is inferred from the interaction of presentational process and presented world. Sometimes either presentational process or presented world seem to be absent, for instance in the figural narrative situation, or in dialogue. (The speech act is then perceived as part of the presented world). Narrative elements are howerver framing these fragments, and guide the reader. Also in first person narrative, when the narrating and experiencing selves coalesce:

63- "In such coalescence, first-person narration approaches lyrical modes of presentation: we are dealing with a fusion of presented world and presentational process" (nevertheless, there is a general narrative sense). If the presented world is suppressed (e.g. in advice to the reader), there is a linear connection between narrator and reader.

- Interior monologue: 2 cases. It can be embedded in other narrative situations or structures, or it may be a structure-carrying feature (Bloom's vs. Molly's monologues). The latter gives a strong sense of the character as a narrator.

- In narrative, two strata, each of which demands priority alternatively while reading.

65- "The essence of the lyrical mode could be defined analogously by the flowing into one stratum of the presentational process and the presented world, while in the language of the stage drama the stratum of presentational process is altogether buried."

Strata: sounds (print) — surface linguistic text; presentational process and presented world (normally in this order); interpretive abstractions.

The schematic givenness of the text and its concretization are two different strata in each, both presentational process and in presented world.

7 levels, then, as against Ingarden's four levels.

A dynamic aspect of concretization, of activation of buried acts (in the signs of the text ) of telling and point of view.

Bierwisch: microstructure of short-term memory vs. "macrostructure" of total effect. Cf. temporal vs. "spatial" form.  The latter is constructed through the former.

Iser: the process of reading as an oscillation between the alien and the familiar in the text. Primary vs. secondary concretizations. The first is more essential.

The text is confronted with typified knowledge: inter-textuality, etc., different with each text and reader.

Husserl: "Noetic" (referring to the act of experiencing) vs. "Noematic" (referring to that which has been experienced). Notions such as "the erotics of the text", etc., refer to noesis, whereas structuralists focus on the "noema" (only a partial and unstable noema is constructed). Ruthrof describes the phases of the process: interaction of reading with the partial noema, the effect on the reader...


5. Ladders of Fictionality

The author projects. The text presents. The reader concretizes. Narrative is "a literary form in which a narrative attitude is structure-carrying, the other two major attitudes being an existential attitude, or the expression of our immediate state of being, and a gestural attitude, which constitutes itself by staged or stageable language" [i.e. lyric and drama] (78). In the lyric presentational process and presented world are mixed, and cannot be separated. In drama the presentational process is lacking. "Fiction" means a particular kind of projection of the author's world into his work: we also call "fiction" the "given" language and the "reconstructed" world of the reader. There are ladders relating the world-out-there to author, text, and reader—phases of interpretation. "Authorial reduction" vs. "aesthetic reconstruction."

81- "Only in non-fictional projection (...) does the author attend consistently to individual objects in the word-out-there", or, from the reader's point of view, "can each spatial and temporal detail, or aspects of events and human acts be argued to have a traceable source in the actual world"—etc. Ontologically, it would not be a verbal reflection, only an encoding of apperceived and apprehended fact, at least ideally. In practice, resources are borrowed from fiction. A mode of projection is to be adequately responded to by the reader with a reciprocal mode of appresentation.

As reconstruction:

Realism & detail do not equal specific, while allegory does not equal general. Cf. Husserl's distinction between formalization and generalization. 83- "Applied to reading this means that deformalization refers to acts which give mental-material content to linguistic formulae or to moving from the status of linguistic meaning units to that of the schematic world, appresentation to the filling of the undetermined areas within this skeletal construct" (cf. Husserl's 'pairing').

Possibility of inappropriate readings: even if we are free to make them disregarding textual evidence. E.g. In Cold Blood discourages private appresentation.

Other modes: "realistic"(fiction) vs. "mythical"—the pith is the discovery of a pattern of meaning beyond verisimilitude. The mythic is largely present in the realistic novel. E.g. in Nostromo: a spatial centre as thematic centre: moral attitudes, etc.

As documentary reading, allegory curtails appresentation: Abstraction but with rigid rules (vs. the mythic). Reading Kafka, "we respond to a forceful impulse to search for an ideational superstructure comparable to those metaphysical schemata which we continuously superimpose on our apperception of the world-out-there" (91).

As reduction:

Creation of a horizon which defines the world created. (Again, in Nostromo). Fantasy narrative is striking in that it hedges a world of its own.

The presentational process has a bearing on the fictional world: it is visible when a narrator hands over the narrative to another one; the reader then enters a different sphere. Sometimes the presentational process devours the presented world. E.g. in As I Lay Dying. It is only to the reflection of the different consciousnesses that we can attach any meaning, and not to the "objective" world.

According to Auerbach, narration inside fiction achieves an objective description of the speaker through a subjective procedure (the creation of an even more fictive world).

95- "Strictly speaking we step inside such narrower horizons whenever a persona other than the primary narrator speaks or thinks, in direct speech, in letters (...) in free indirect speech, (...) in interior monologue (...) or in diary entries" [Cf. Mieke Bal's conception of narrative levels- JAGL].

96- To summarize, "there are not simply literary objects identifiable as documentary, realistic, mythic, allegorical, and fantasy stories, but rather attitudes of consciousness on the part of the authors which have entered, more or less successfully, the stories' material foundations, their texts, and corresponding attitudes of consciousness on the part of the reader if adequate reading is to be accomplished."

Criteria for modes of narrative between fiction and non-fiction, etc. (related to horizon, apperception, the real world, etc.).


6. Bracketed World and Reader Construction in the Modern Short Story

"
Centrifugal [linguistic] macrostructural concerns contrast with the centripetal structures which the reader must activate in short fiction". Both are describable.

Centripetal semantic structures do not imply compression of signified world or linguistic structures.

Several explanations have been given of brevity: "modern haste", "minor form" or "static structure" (long fiction would be "dynamic").

From the study of popular short fiction to the evolution of the acts of writing and reading. Chekhov, Poe, James, emphasize the way the reader "fills up" short fiction, or the importance of uninterrupted reading performance.

Many nouvelles at this moment focus on a character's discovering in a flash meaningful vs. meaningless existence. Both amplification and brevity are used—a double movement in the process of reading: (102) "subordinated accumulated information and foregrounded reduced world are thus constructed and abstracted to shape a complex aesthetic-ideological experience". Cf. the existential boundary-situations (103) "in which we wrest from life an authentic existence or stare absurdity in the face"; boundary-situation story is a story of the bracketed world. Spatial and temporal reduction; the presentational process is reduced: scene in authorial narrative, and narrator with limited understanding in first-person narrative. Identification with the implied reader demands an adjustment on the part of the reader. The boundary situation may be at the end after exposition; exposition is included in the present as remembrance; or the story may be limited to the boundary situation. A tight structure guides the reader. Now this type of short story is exhausted: replaced by metafiction, more ludic and less ideological. (Rupture).


7. Narrative Strands: Presented and Presentational

110- "an important part of inter-textuality is the reader's expectation of noetic as noematic strands"; (111) "in both presented and presentational strands it is above all structural leaps as to personae and spatial aspects which indicate a change from one strand to the other, while the temporal aspects may or may not differ from those of other strands." There are large-scale patterns of syntagmatic and paradigmatic relationships:

Syntagmatic coding in presented world: contiguity of personae, spatial and temporal aspects, ideology...

Syntagmatic coding in presentational process: continnum of narrating voice (identity of the narrator)

112- "By contrast, multi-strand arrangement in both process and world may be understood as macrostructural paradigmatic structures" (alternation of narrated worlds or narrators).

1. Multi-strand or heterogeneous process

• Presentational strands and homogeneous world: Rashomon, As I Lay Dying (In these the core does not exist; the object is in the subject)
• Presentational strands and heterogenous worlds: Wuthering Heights, Lord Jim.
• Heterogeneous process and world, changing to homogeneous process and world: The Sound and the Fury.

2. Single-strand or homogeneous processes

• Single-strand process and homogeneous world: First peson, The Catcher in the Rye.
• Single-strand process and heterogeneous world: The Magic Poker.
• Single-strand process and heterogeneous world becoming homogeneous world.

118- "We experience strands as interlinked because the link means something. Or, in Saussure's terminology, any structural relationship is itself a sign."
Splicing and synthetising matrices of higher order (presentational and presented strands) gives rise to a potential polyphony of narrative art.


8. Acts of Narrating: Transforming of Presentational Control

122- "Narrative structure has room for a large variety of acts of narrating apart from reporting, describing or rememberting. We find acts of teaching, reprimanding, exhorting, ridiculing, explaining, projecting, comparing, prophesying or abstracting." Intertextuality is present in narrator, reader & implied reader; it is crucial to interpretation. Studies on point-of-view only have sense when joined to the question of signification.

Relationship between presentational process - presented world - implied reader:

124-    Triangle with three vertices: narrator - world - reader.  Narrative is a structure in Piaget's sense.

Narrator
Authority
Partner
Minor
World
Defined by narrator, defining reader
Negotiable
Defining narrator, judged by reader
Reader
Minor
Partner
Authority

129- "In the actual reading experience of omniscient novels this sense of dependence is usually concealed. Instead, we are led to develop a sense more of being the narrator's partner, if not his chum."
(Application to a wide variety of genres, etc.).

In objective narration, (129) "the very restriction of the implied reader to a mere witness of schematically sketched physical details tends to grant the actual reader a new freedom" (...); (130) "his stock of inter-textual and everyday typifications will grant his a more complex vision than is coded in the text."

In satire (analogous to jokes, etc.): "the actual reader is again given the chance of identifying with the implied reader and becoming a co-satirist; or he may fail to bisociate and so declare himself part of the ridiculed world."

136- "Through the realization of the implied reader and its functions vis-à-vis presented world and presentational process, work ideology reveals itself in its quasi-personal aspects: as implied authorial stance."



9. Parodic narrative

For the Russian Formalists, all literature is parodic in the broadest sense of that term. Parody is a general attribute of consciousness. Parody is part of ideological mutation. The opposition "Parody of form vs. Parody of content" is grounded on a binary conception of the work, not a polyphonic one.

142- "all literary parody points to the literariness, the interpretative rather than the representational quallities of works of literature" (they are often mixed, though). Parody is a tertiary construct (literature in general is secondary; documentation, e.g. In Cold Blood, is primary). Parody may be aimed at any of the strata of print or sound, linguistic formations, presentational process or presented world, or interpretative abstractions. (Examples).

Parody modifies the source object but it always potentially transcends it. It may create its own patterns, etc. We concretize the presentational process and the presented world of both the parody and the parodied structure.


10. Narrative and the form-content metaphor

The reader's imaginative construction of modality in literature. Definition of literature as messages oriented upon themselves? It is not self-sufficient in nay case; the reader draws on intertextuality, external ideology, reality...

The reader helps to construct form. Form is not merely a matter of the printed text. We impose structures on whatever we confront. The form-content trope causes misconceptions when it is given ontological validity. Ruthrof follows the pair form/content through history and shows its polysemy, mainly with three meanings: 1) As separable components; 2) As fused into one inseparable unity; 3) As elements in a dialectic relationship.  The first conception is found in Plotinus, Flaubert, the Marxists, the New Critics. The second, in Schlegel, Coleridge, Hegel, Flaubert, Pater, Croce, the Russian Formalists. The third is found in the Marxists: Social evolution in dialectical relationship with the history of forms.  For Ruthrof, these terms are best rejected.


11. Translating narrative

Theories of translation often have inadequate linguistic and semiologic bases (old triadic theories, etc.). Jakobson's triad is more useful (intralingual, interlingual ("common") or intersemiotic translation). But: in reading, we do not use language in a purely analytic way; we activate our experiential knowledge (with paradigmatic associations, etc.).  Concretization is based on a word's denotation and connotation. The translator must recreate the basic structure, in all levels.

At the linguistic level, both texts must have the same deep structure and the same lacunae of indeterminacy. At least, surface syntax is ultimately dependable. The presentational process and the presented world must be similar.

Translation of the work's ideology: Notes are indispensable, or introductions.

192- "Translations play a vital role in the cultural life of any nation; they are a measure of how far it is in touch with the rest of the world, how far it dares or seeks to encourage foreign codes and visions to modify its own. In this sense translations are an instance of 'parole', placed in a dialectical relationship with langue. Sometimes a translation becomes fully integrated, so that it is understood as a part of langue.


12. Fictional Modality: A Challenge to Linguistics

Modality in fiction involves more than narrational speech acts: the presentational process is subsumed under the reader's construction;

194- "a novel is a statement made in a certain manner".

Language (even artistic language) is a structure for persuasion, not only for referential orientation.

194- "literary art can be seen as the discourse which, certainly potentially, is more fully determined by modal operations than other forms of utterance." But there is a vast gap between the demands of literature and the tools of modal logic and linguistics. (Modal analysis may be both accurate and trivial for literature). Russell, Quine, vs. modal logic.

Linguistics provides a restricted treatment of modality: of modal auxiliaries, etc. Covert modality is ignored.

Halliday's approach is better: the interpersonal function is realized through modality.

196- Eco: "The aesthetic text becomes a multiple source of unpredictable 'speech acts' whose real author remains undetermined, sometimes being the sender of the message, at others the addressee who collaborates in its development".

A tripartite hierarchy of speech acts:
- Presented discourse
- Presentational discourse
- Authorial stance

197- "The construction of narrative meaning relies on a vast matrix of possible modal transformations" with "a relatively high degree of modal instability" (there is the possibility of ironic reversal).

Literary theory has disregarded modal phenomena (unlike specific critical readings). Modality is all-pervading; in Halliday, it is the speaker's "assessment of the validity of what he is saying".

199- "The total sphere of unformulated text alternatives (...) functions as a potential set of modal qualifiers of a text." How much of it is activated depends on the reader's competence, ideological position, etc.

The reading of explicit authorial textual alternatives, as well as that of the repressed ones uncovered by psychonalysis, is legitimate.







—oOo—


martes, 1 de abril de 2014

READING THE MONSTER

Esta fue una tesis sobre narratología y estética de la recepción que escribí en América. También trata de Stephen Crane, en concreto comentando "The Monster", un relato sobre un sirviente negro desfigurado, ambientado en un pueblo norteamericano, tras la guerra civil. Escribí la tesis en la Universidad Brown, en 1989. Con ella culminé un Master of Arts en inglés, en el que obtuve, con cierto alivio por mi parte, las calificaciones máximas. Y en un tiempo récord, pues creo que fui el único de mi promoción que consiguió terminar el máster en un año. La tesis, por fin, hoy llega a sus pantallas, que sin duda la estaban esperando.

Texto completo:
Abstract: This book-length paper is a Brown University dissertation in American literature and literary theory. A theoretical analysis of the concept of authorial intention in narrative fiction, and of its structural and communicational implications, is followed by an in-depth examination of Stephen Crane's novella 'The Monster' (1898) as a case study in both structural analysis and critical controversy. The critical responses to this work are examined with regard to their ideological and aesthetic assumptions, thus showing the relevance of the model proposed and providing a detailed analysis of the way in which the meaning and structure of a text are interactionally constructed.

Puede obtenerse impresa en University Microfilms International. Y en PDF, en el SSRN (
http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2412440) y más concretamente en estas revistas, con fecha de 22 de marzo de 2014 (Date posted: March 22, 2014):


eJournal Classifications
CSN Subject Matter eJournals
    

        
CSN Subject Matter eJournals
    
        
            
LIT Subject Matter eJournals
    

        
LIT Subject Matter eJournals
    








_____. Reading 'The Monster': The Interpretation of Authorial Intention in the Criticism of Narrative Fiction. (MA diss. Brown U, 1989). Ann Arbor: UMI, 1997.*

         http://dl.lib.brown.edu/theses/theses.php?task=search&id=4512

         2009

_____. Reading 'The Monster': The Interpretation of Authorial Intention in the Criticism of Narrative Fiction. Online PDF at SSRN 22 March 2014.*

         http://dx.doi.org/0.2139/ssrn.2412440

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2412440

         2014

Cognition & Culture … eJournal 22 March 2014.*

         http://www.ssrn.com/link/Cognition-Culture.html

         2014

         Cognition & the Arts eJournal 22 March 2014.*

         http://www.ssrn.com/link/Cognition-Arts.html

         2014

         American Literature eJournal 22 March 2014.*

         http://www.ssrn.com/link/English-American-Literature.html

         2014

         Literary Theory & Criticism eJournal 22 March 2014.*

         http://www.ssrn.com/link/English-Lit-Theory-Criticism.html

2014

_____. "Reading The Monster." In García Landa, Vanity Fea 1 April 2014.*

         http://vanityfea.blogspot.com.es/2014/04/reading-monster.html

         2014

_____. Reading 'The Monster': The Interpretation of Authorial Intention in the Criticism of Narrative Fiction. iPaper at Academia 26 Sept. 2014.*

         https://www.academia.edu/8497840/

         2014

_____. Reading 'The Monster': The Interpretation of Authorial Intention in the Criticism of Narrative Fiction. iPaper at ResearchGate 26 Sept. 2014.*

         https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266082263

         2014

_____. Reading 'The Monster': The Interpretation of Authorial Intention in the Criticism of Narrative Fiction. Online at Humanities Commons 26 March 2018.*

         http://dx.doi.org/10.17613/M6JK33

         https://hcommons.org/deposits/item/hc:18693/

         2018



—oOo—

Mi fotoblog

Mi fotoblog
se puede ver haciendo clic en la foto ésta de Termineitor. Y hay más enlaces a cosas mías al pie de esta página.