Doctor Benway ([info]doctor_benway) wrote,
@ 2005-02-20 16:53:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
"Heinekin?! PBR Motherfucker!!"
There exist multiple ethical or metaphysical realities simultaneously, each much like the others, but ruled by different tendencies or forces. The protagonist exists in the reality most familiar to the audience-- for all intents and purposes, 'normality'. The protagonist foretells their eventual crisis when they show an interest in the other realities which are somehow revealed: places that most people are unaware of, or ignore, or are frightened of; places which are populated not by characters, but the personification of skeletons in the characters' closets, where human interaction is motivated not by a need for sociability, but by a collective anxiety over dirty little secrets. This other-world is so compelling, so different, that it eventually claims the protagonist, causing a collision between the world and the other-world. The protagonist cannot and does not exist in one or the other, but is torn between them violently, causing intense disorientation and trauma. These events come to a head in the form of a third reality, a separate place in space-time which is an elaborate and deceptive maquette of the world, but in which the physical, temporal and ethical laws that shape the human experience are broken-- a purgatory of sorts. The protagonist is doomed to live in non-time until a heroic event can take place: a symbolic decision or action which anchors the protagonist in one reality or the other, allowing him to escape the fundamentally upsetting ethical and physical ambiguity for a more coherent reality.



(13 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]justdandy
2005-02-20 11:36 pm UTC (link)
careful, or you'll end up being quoted here.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]doctor_benway
2005-02-20 11:40 pm UTC (link)
Well, assuming you 'feel' what i'm getting at, I'd be compelled to read your attempt at clarity.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]justdandy
2005-02-21 12:33 am UTC (link)
"Reality" as we know it is divided into two separate but similar spheres: the physical reality of day-to-day life, and the literary reality created by our use of language to describe this experience. Language strives to imitate the day-to-day sphere as faithfully as possible, but an inevitable crisis occurs when the author realizes the futility of this venture. Literary reality can never bridge the gap between itself and day-to-day reality. Language is abstract, arbitrary, and non-referential. It has no connection to the living, breathing world except the connection we choose to make with it.

As simultaneous readers and writers of text, we continually oscillate between an attempt to chronicle objectively, and an attempt to infiltrate and judge subjectively. Our scientific observations of day-to-day life are clouded by irrationality and emotion, which is betrayed by our tendency to focus on the dirty little secret behind the closet door rather than the door and furniture of the room. In writing, details must be omitted and focus kept primarily at the area of interest. Whichever fascination we choose inevitably exposes our private prejudices, letting the world see our inner voyeur.

Thus, the author of a text has to make a conscious decision: he must choose either to retain his air of objectivity at the expense of misrepresenting the world, or to admit his failure and fetishism. The latter is an especially vulnerable position and the former a fundamentally dishonest one, but the decision must be made in order to escape the third choice: a vague and undefined sphere where consensual meaning does not exist. A successful author -- if success is defined by the ability to convey the most meaning to the most number of people -- is one who takes a firm stand on one side or the other. The connections he makes with language form a cohesive net, not a tangled, meaningless mess.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]justdandy
2005-02-21 12:36 am UTC (link)
see also: roland barthes' "from work to text," ferdinand de saussure's "course in general linguistics," and jacques derrida's "of grammatology."

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]eunicemcgee
2005-02-21 05:33 am UTC (link)
(worship). have you ever read samuel delany's triton? he posits a fictional society where speakers consider their language's relationship with reality to be tenuous or coincidental at best, or absent altogether. i've been going a little nuts lately trying to catch all the ways we skew our own reality and figuring out how to escape them. (you'd better watch out before i start streamlining automobiles and reinventing buckey balls)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]justdandy
2005-02-21 05:50 am UTC (link)
shit, it's taken me three months to realize that the concept of "literary theory" is one big circle-jerking tautology that is nevertheless inescapable until the day we discover telepathy.

damn you, language... you hurt so good.

i have not read the delany but will keep it in mind for that one elusive night when i'm not assigned 230943204392 pages of reading. actually, that one elusive night when i'm not assigned 230943204392 pages of reading and am sober. yeah, that'll happen.

um. i miss people. people and i should spend more time together.

heh. buckey balls.

okay, back to freud.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]eunicemcgee
2005-02-21 10:38 pm UTC (link)
eh, don't actually keep it in mind. the book, i mean, since all quality ideas in it are imprisoned in a fortress of horrendous writing. but in terms of people, and spending time with them, well, do keep that in mind.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]doctor_benway
2005-02-21 08:11 am UTC (link)
awful sassy, huh

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]justdandy
2005-02-21 12:37 am UTC (link)
p.s. this lit theory whore loves you.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]doctor_benway
2005-02-21 01:00 am UTC (link)
I think that I went wrong in using too cryptic a title. I was trying to express this sort of nagging subconscious understanding of what seems like a pretty consistent theme in David Lynch's films (specifically, Lost Highway, Blue Velvet and Twin Peaks). The not-wolrd seems to be manifested as a shack out in the middle of nowhere, the singer's apartment with the violent tableau, and the white/black lodges, respectively.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]liamtheruiner
2005-02-21 12:37 am UTC (link)
There exist multiple ethical or metaphysical realities simultaneously... blah blah blah. where're the tits, motherfucker?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]doctor_benway
2005-02-21 12:47 am UTC (link)
here, here, here, here, and here.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]liamtheruiner
2005-02-21 06:33 am UTC (link)
thanks.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(13 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…