Hmm this makes me question a lot about the unreliable narrator as a vehicle that takes you further from the actual meaning of a piece. Especially in speaking of art or describing things, as you mentioned, it's a disservice to 'explain' things, in essence. We end up playing a long drawn out version of telephone when retelling the tales of a produced piece. But that also becomes an art in and of itself - one that evolves over time and picks up seasoned flavors of multiple storytellers and writers and 'describers'. Different people will make sense of the same reality in diverse ways, therefore multiplying our shared experience.
I could spiral here if not careful. You've given me much to think about, thank you.
Hey thank you for reading! r.e. unreliable narrators, I think when executed thoughtfully another way to put this is that the whole point is the reality people are describing only exists as they see it. Eg I’m thinking of Sound and the Fury where it’s really really hard to work out what’s going on in both Benjy’s and Quentin’s sections for pretty different reasons, but I think a lot of the meaning is there *because* of the way only these two characters are capable of relating things.
I like your point about playing a drawn out game of telephone and definitely relate—we all add something of ourselves when we try to explain things!
I think of meaning as a kind of intersubjective aha, what in the post above I refer to as a game-break, when 2 minds make sense of a new bit of unfactored reality in the same way. There is not just recognition of the thing, but mutual recognition of mutual recognition of the thing, creating a bond between two minds and a separation from other minds that have not shared that experience. Illusory one-way versions of this present as stalking and obsession. An individual alone cannot create meaning as such. Only wordless, meaningless horror of a labatutian “when we cease to understand the world” variety. A lot of the skill in skilled interviewing, which I think you do intuitively, is engineering game-breaking meaningful moments live, on record. Conversations that lack that sound dead in a way.
Thanks for the link (and the far too kind words)! I really liked “I earnestly hope there are irreducibly subjective elements of being, but I have been through enough game-break moments to realize that we are far less existentially unique than I think.” Reminds me of something DFW said about how we are all the same in thinking we are so totally different from everyone else.
I think I have it a lot easier with interviewing because I can just dig around people’s work for what feels interesting!
Hmm this makes me question a lot about the unreliable narrator as a vehicle that takes you further from the actual meaning of a piece. Especially in speaking of art or describing things, as you mentioned, it's a disservice to 'explain' things, in essence. We end up playing a long drawn out version of telephone when retelling the tales of a produced piece. But that also becomes an art in and of itself - one that evolves over time and picks up seasoned flavors of multiple storytellers and writers and 'describers'. Different people will make sense of the same reality in diverse ways, therefore multiplying our shared experience.
I could spiral here if not careful. You've given me much to think about, thank you.
Hey thank you for reading! r.e. unreliable narrators, I think when executed thoughtfully another way to put this is that the whole point is the reality people are describing only exists as they see it. Eg I’m thinking of Sound and the Fury where it’s really really hard to work out what’s going on in both Benjy’s and Quentin’s sections for pretty different reasons, but I think a lot of the meaning is there *because* of the way only these two characters are capable of relating things.
I like your point about playing a drawn out game of telephone and definitely relate—we all add something of ourselves when we try to explain things!
You might like this old 2009 post of mine https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/03/26/the-tragedy-of-wiios-law/
I think of meaning as a kind of intersubjective aha, what in the post above I refer to as a game-break, when 2 minds make sense of a new bit of unfactored reality in the same way. There is not just recognition of the thing, but mutual recognition of mutual recognition of the thing, creating a bond between two minds and a separation from other minds that have not shared that experience. Illusory one-way versions of this present as stalking and obsession. An individual alone cannot create meaning as such. Only wordless, meaningless horror of a labatutian “when we cease to understand the world” variety. A lot of the skill in skilled interviewing, which I think you do intuitively, is engineering game-breaking meaningful moments live, on record. Conversations that lack that sound dead in a way.
Thanks for the link (and the far too kind words)! I really liked “I earnestly hope there are irreducibly subjective elements of being, but I have been through enough game-break moments to realize that we are far less existentially unique than I think.” Reminds me of something DFW said about how we are all the same in thinking we are so totally different from everyone else.
I think I have it a lot easier with interviewing because I can just dig around people’s work for what feels interesting!
Nice lyrical style you’ve got going here
Thank you! I think it’s an unconscious influence from reading Kenner 😆