File spoon-archives/film-theory.archive/film-theory_1995/film-theory_Feb.95, message 11


Date: Thu, 2 Feb 95 23:35:58 -0500
Subject: Re: Point-of-view, primary id and all that jazz


> In a broader narratological perspective, one tries to account for this 
> apparent anomaly by distinguishing between the real reader (or viewer) 
> and the "implied reader" (or viewer).  The latter is an entity intrinsic 
> to the narrative text, that is, "standardized" recipients of the 
> narrative message.  A real reader or viewer may of course totally reject 
> the kind of experience that the narrative is projecting upon them.  But 
> then the narrrative transaction simply doesn't work. 

Yes, but this is a different kind of theory; it is based, as you say, on
an analysis of the text itself -- of its demands.  The "implied reader"
is deduced from the text.  This is in contrast to, for instance, Metz
of "The Imaginary Signifier", who talks about "the filmic state",
unconscious productions, denial, etc.  But actually, I would love to
be argued out of this distinction.  Can it be argued, that Metz, too, 
works from the text itself and extracts from it the implied contractual 
conditions of its proper viewing? 

- malgosia 

     ------------------

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005