I actually wanted to add more clarity to what was written earlier on the existence of fictional characters.
"A fictional character is not one thing but many."
Let's revise that to be: "A fictional character is nothing."
There is no fictional character.
There is the writer thinking of a set of qualities and stuff that make up the fictional character. There is the actor, (in a play, movie or TV show) pretending. There is the reader or viewer, reading or observing and forming images and concepts in their mind in accordance with what they are reading or observing.
A legitimate interpretation is one where those concepts and images that are formed in the reader's/viewer's mind do not conflict with what is given by the author/creator of the character.
All this is not helpful for suspension of disbelief...Talk of "canon" and "not canon" is much more useful in aiding suspension of disbelief. But my version is more to the truth.
"A fictional character is not one thing but many."
Let's revise that to be: "A fictional character is nothing."
There is no fictional character.
There is the writer thinking of a set of qualities and stuff that make up the fictional character. There is the actor, (in a play, movie or TV show) pretending. There is the reader or viewer, reading or observing and forming images and concepts in their mind in accordance with what they are reading or observing.
A legitimate interpretation is one where those concepts and images that are formed in the reader's/viewer's mind do not conflict with what is given by the author/creator of the character.
All this is not helpful for suspension of disbelief...Talk of "canon" and "not canon" is much more useful in aiding suspension of disbelief. But my version is more to the truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment