Hi Erica,
Pursuant to "narratological principles", one would inquire, "Whose voice is
present in the text?" and furthermore, "Who speaks of god?"
Strictly speaking, finding an answer to these questions satisfies
the requirements of what the practitioners require of their endeavor; ergo,
their rather narcisstic notion of "sense".
Yet for real-worlders the sense of a text means justifying the fact
that this particular, privileged voice should be endowed with value,
hence, meaning. This would obviously involve formulating a judgment that's
either exterior to the plot, or an admission that the act of plot-ness really
means selection from a potential infinitude of glosses. With respect to
Abe, I, personally, give high priority to that of the psychotherapist over
that of the rabbi.
At the end of the day, narratology's "principles" are nothing more than the
particular theoretical/knowledge pool concepts that one imposes upon a "story"
in order to endow it with meaning. For example, to the extent that you accept
the axioms of Freud, Chomsky, or Marx, one's
personal narratologal machine will respond accordingly.
Spelling god backwards will offer you the presence of a real, live object.
This is to say that, of course, we normally employ different analytical tools to
describe biological entities versus imaginary constructs. On the other
hand, we can simply invent a discreet set of concepts which will describe
both real and imaginary entities.
Ostensibly, this is lot's of fun for those who would otherwise have become
players in the fashion industry, or lovers of all things French-y.
By the way, I loved Kiss of the Spider Woman, too.
Bill Harris
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, May 03, 2008 4:46
AM
Subject: shaggy dog....
> all i'm interested in is narratology . . . narratology is
not part of
> the infinities of religious speculation, i'ts just an
attempt to sort out
> how we make sense of narratives . narratives
about gods follow the same
> narratological principles as narratives
about dogs=20>
Really?
Surely any level of description
at which this might be the case would
hardly qualify as 'making sense of a
narrative'?
BTW, belated thanks to all who kindly responded a little
while ago to a
query on behalf of a student concerning ethics and the
camera. She
benefitted considerably from your suggestions.
Erica
Sheen
*
*
Film-Philosophy salon
After hitting 'reply' please
always delete the text of the message you are replying to.
To leave, send
the message: leave film-philosophy to: [log in to unmask].
Or
visit: http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/film-philosophy.html
For
help email: [log in to unmask], not the
salon.
*
Film-Philosophy journal: http://www.film-philosophy.com
Contact:
[log in to unmask]
**