Mid-morning. Carol is over walking at the
community center, you have been watching the pilot and the introduction to the
first episode of the “X-Files”. Last night you finished the first season of “The
Man in the High Castle” on Amazon Prime Video. This brought up Coleridge’s ‘willing
suspension of disbelief’, which you first knowingly experienced in Ms. Harley’s
Freshman English class in 1956 when you were assigned Coleridge’s poems “Rime
of the Ancient Mariner” and “Kubla Khan”.
Later,
1239 hours. I did my 40 minutes of exercises and had a warm soaker bath for
arthritic pains and a refreshing, but before I did I those I looked up willing
suspension of disbelief and found this article better in my focus.
** **
Paradox of fiction
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The paradox of fiction asks why do we experience strong emotions
when, for example, we are watching Hamlet on stage while at the same time
knowing that it is not really Hamlet but merely an actor.
The paradox
of fiction is a philosophical problem about how people can experience
strong emotions from purely fictional things, such as art, literature and
imagination. The paradox draws attention to an everyday issue of how people are
moved by things, which, in many ways, do not really exist. Although, the
ontology of fictional things in general has been discussed in philosophy since
Plato, although it was first suggested by Colin Radford and Michael Weston in
1975. After Radford & Weston's original paper they and others have
continued the discussion giving the problem both slightly differing
formulations as well as different solutions. The basic paradox, which is
largely accepted by all is:
1
Most people have emotional
responses to characters, objects, events etc., which they know to be
fictitious.
2
On the other hand, in order for
us to be emotionally moved, we must believe that these characters, objects, or
events, truly exist.
3
But no person who takes
characters or events to be fictional at the same time believes that they are
real.
The
paradox is that all three premises cannot seem to be true at the same time. If
points 1 and 2 are taken to be true, it would seem that either point 3 must be
false, or we have reached a contradiction. On the other hand, if we assume
points 1 and 3 to be true, then 2 must be false. Or if we assume that 2 and 3
are true, we need to reject point 1.
Proposed solutions
The
various proposed solutions to the paradox can be divided into three basic
groups:
•
The pretend or the simulation
theories, proposed for example by Kendall Walton.
•
The
pretend theories deny premise 1 and argue that with fiction we do not
experience real emotions but rather something less intense. For example, when
watching a horror movie where the monster makes an attack towards the viewer
(towards the camera), the viewer can be startled but does not truly fear for
his or her life.
•
The thought theories, for
example from Peter Lamarque, Noel Carroll, and Robert J. Yanal.
•
The
thought theories deny premise 2 and claim that we can have genuine emotions
from things even if we do not believe them to exist.
•
The illusion or realist
theories, for example from Alan Paskow.
•
The illusion theories deny premise 3 and claim that,
in a way, the fictional characters are real. They suggest that Samuel Taylor
Coleridge was right saying that fiction involves a "willing
suspension of disbelief", i.e. believing in the fiction
while engaging with it.
Selected and edited from Wikipedia – Paradox of
Fiction
** **
1559
hours. I am with the illusion theories on this one – “in a way, the fictional
characters are real” – no question about it; in my books the characters are
real as I write about them; where would be the authenticity if this were not
so. – rho
Earlier you had lunch at Potbelly’s on
Mason-Montgomery Road then came home and you both raked and bagged the leaves
in the front yard. Afterwards, you came upstairs for a nap and Jadah settled in
on your chest; Carol came up, wrapped herself in an extra blanket and read the Consumer’s
Report that arrived today. – Amorella
1612
hours. It is a dreary, foggy and cold day; we have the heating/ ‘massaging’
blanket out on one of the twin beds in Kim’s old room to use when needed. We
have each used it already. Earlier this morning thick fog stretched across the
Ohio River bottomland all the way up to Mason – reminds me of the first scene in Macbeth.
** **
Macbeth
ACT 1
Scene
1
Thunder
and Lightning. Enter three Witches.
FIRST
WITCH
When
shall we three meet again?
In
thunder, lightning, or in rain?
SECOND
WITCH
When
the hurly-burly’s done,
When
the battle’s lost and won.
THIRD
WITCH
That
will be ere the set of sun.
FIRST
WITCH
Where
the place?
SECOND
WITCH
Upon
the heath.
THIRD
WITCH
There
to meet with Macbeth.
FIRST
WITCH
I
come, Graymalkin.
SECOND WITCH
Paddock
calls.
THIRD WITCH
Anon.
ALL
Fair
is foul, and foul is fair;
Hover
through the fog and filthy air.
They exit.
Selected from the Digital Folger
Shakespeare Library
** **
1645
hours. On such a setting as today in southwest Ohio I envision the deathly crew
into our modern political setting – imagination not needed. Conjuring not
needed either. We all live in alternate worlds of the mindanheart that infect each
soul that ‘knows’ of the other. We have created light but much of it is
artificial and many a mind has not taken sufficient time to know who she or he
really is, to then stand up and say, “I exist as I am in life or death, it
makes no difference.” (I am thus seen being caught up in the drama of the
moment in my mind – it is real enough even in digital text.)
You, on your private stage, leak out, boy,
and you don’t even mind the humor of it. – Amorella
1700
hours. The recognition of one’s silliness in one’s heart is twinned in the body
and the spirit, Amorella. We are built to be giddy, and can be so even while
standing beneath the hanging tree.
No comments:
Post a Comment