--- In
rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com, "Jacques Debierue"
<matrxtech@...> wrote:.
>
> > What I am saying is that beyond just a
sensual
> > kneejerk reflex, reader response is a dynamic
process
> > that can and often is open to influence by
critical
> > discourse. So rather than being a secondary
also-ran
> > in the reading process, analysis is a major
player in
> > the shaping of a cultivated reader
exerperience. In a
> > sense, the treatise begets the
orgasm.
> >
>
> I don't think so. In particular, thinking of a story
within a given
> framework does change the experience. If you say
"I'm reading this
> book, a noir book in the tradition of...", there's
another you, the
> analytical you, reading alongside. You gain comfort,
but you lose
> transparency in the reception of what you're
reading. >
>
> The danger is in sacrificing the truth for the
facts.
> Now truth is a difficult concept to apply here. E.B.
White wrote
>that the trouble with truth is its many varieties...
psychological
>truth is unprovable and you can't argue with it. If a
reader
>believes in the characters and situations, some sort
of "truth" has
>been conveyed,event though a writer's profession is
to tell lies.
>
> Best,
>
> mrt
>
Very well put. Thanks.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 23 Aug 2007 EDT