I think we're using 'instruct' differently, Mark. I was
meaning it in the sense of 'to direct, give orders to' (in
keeping with the idea of 'moral lessons'), whereas I think
you're using it to mean 'to provide knowledge'.
Writers provide story, which may indeed contain knowledge
(some of which may be inaccurate, deliberately or otherwise
-- writers are liars by trade and all fiction is a lie by
definition).
Al
----- Original Message -----
From:
DJ-Anonyme@webtv.net
To:
rara-avis-l@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2006 12:58 AM
Subject: Re: RARA-AVIS: Re: Name Your
Poison
Al wrote:
"I honestly don't think writers (particularly
those writing from
character-specific points of view) do a lot of
instructing,
intentionally or otherwise."
It's impossible not to. In presenting a world as
"real," you are
presenting culturally constructed values as
natural. For instance, in
showing the interactions of characters of
different gender, race,
sexuality, class, etc, a writer addresses the
"nature" of those groups
and the relationships between them. But those
relationships can vary
widely, comparing them across time and/or
culture, it's easy to see that
much (but not all, biology also plays role) of
what is thought of as
natural is actually socially constructed. Whether
a writer means to or
not, a culture's ideology is being presented. An
appearance of being
ideologically free actually just means that the
values presented are so
taken for granted that they are not noticed. I
think of it as "coloring
inside the lines," often without even realizing
the lines are there.
"More likely, readers do a lot of
interpreting."
Both the writer and the reader are willing
participants in this. If the
fictional world holds no relation to a culture's
socially constructed
values, the reader will not recognize it, and
will probably reject it as
not being the "real" world. Like the writer, the
reader is so
integrated into a society's values that they are
taken for granted, only
noticed when they are not "normal." A culture's
mainstream ideology is
the red lines in a painting viewed through red
lenses; it is no longer
visible, but it's still there.
All art contains ideology, but that doesn't mean
the ideology must be
the point of art. Didacticism, which also bores
me, happens when all
other aspects of art -- plot, character,
entertainment, etc -- are
manipulated in order to call attention to,
usually to sell, a specific
ideology.
Mark
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
RARA-AVIS home page: http://www.miskatonic.org/rara-avis/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rara-avis-l/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:
rara-avis-l-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 30 Aug 2006 EDT