What is "ridiculous" mean? I have found when searched dictionaries, the word to be "in tune" (1). But it is still difficult definitions to explain this term, only to end in "nonsense" total (assuming the time that we know the meaning of the word), and who speaks sense overall, and nonsense about it, and of course this means that they fail (in an attempt). But given the time to be associated with the literature (and other forms of art too!), While I was looking I came across more lines, which provides that no "literary criticism" [where j 'and included attempts to explain the terminology literary] may take a literary work itself, or to be more accurate ... "It [literary criticism] is not a substitute for reading the work itself" (2) because it [a piece of work] is more accurate and precise, and I thought the transfer or explain. So I got the idea that understanding the "ridiculous". I do not need to know the work of an artist absurd, instead of focusing on the talks on this subject. As well as the student literary what happened in my mind at this moment is only Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett, and play silly spin around itself 'Go Dot "axis every absurdity [as so history can say with confidence," from "or" what "Go Pony!]
What I found in the trash of my memories go to that is:
"In November 19, 1957, a group of concerned actors prepare to face the public. Actors were members of the community and the San Francisco Actors Workshop." Consisted of an audience of 1400 convicts in prison San Quentin conducted. Do not play live at San Quentin since Sarah Bernhardt in 1913. Now forty-four years later, and the piece that was chosen largely because there is no woman appeared in it was Samuel Beckett in Waiting for Godot "(3) ...." Beckett real triumph, ... Waiting for Godot came when it was published in book form in 1952, and produced the first January 5, 1953 in a small theater Babylone de (dissolved), ... "(4)
And I also found a few lines of this game:
"...
ESTRGON: Didi.
VLADIMIR: Yes.
ESTRGON: I can not go on like this.
VLADIMIR: This is what you think.
Tarragon if we parted it might be better for us.
VLADIMIR: we will hang us tomorrow (Pause) What did come a point .. Go
If tarragon come from?
VLADIMIR: We will be saved
... "(5)
"I said if I knew, in the play" (6) "Waiting for Godot is not: It is said about Beckett, when asked what it means to go Dutt, answered not tell a story. Explores a fixed position" (7). So it is clear from the outset that Beckett tried to create a "character" without the letter "as he himself does not know him [Jump point, and again on the movement of the plot tends to zero, it is' n there is absolutely no plot. Previously, it was assumed that if there was a piece of literary then it must be a story (or plot) for Tellor any character to be represented., but this is exactly the opposite to revolutionize the concept of him. because it contains "character" who can not say to a field that not only differences in the sequence of events and arrangements are rare with little or movement work: "Nothing happens, no one will work ... not a "(8).
But perhaps "absurd" the period specified for those qualities only of the room? No, there's more as mentioned by critics. In an article on Kalfka, who knows UNESCO understanding of the term as "ridiculous is irrelevant ..." (9). When it becomes clear profit "more things change, as they are" the same (10). This is done by creating unusual situations in the game through Breckett. For example, a child who carries a message of going to the point Astrajohn and Vladimir does not recognize every day of his reappearance. "The French version explicitly states that the boy, who appears in the second chapter is the boy himself to be the first act, but denies that he saw the boy until the two tramps before, and insists that it is the first time that acts as a messenger point Go" (11). It is in "standby mode" which is interpreted by Martin Esslin "The expectation is to experience the work of time, which is constantly changing, but nothing happens at all true, is in itself a change illusion. Continuous time activity is self defeating aimlessly ... "(12).
Thus, this is not feasible Beckett tries to show the absurdity his room. But is it really ridiculous? If we consider some different points of view, we find suddenly something contradictory. This is because we know that "the truth is never real," and that define the situation becomes reality for us, this time. This is the case of malfunction or normal life of the case. When the work is the most common that become "normal" for us, and this is the basis of our understanding. We understand what is the most common and the public. Understand something unusual by referring to things or actions that we understand. This is based on our understanding of the very basic fact on public or shared events, and we call normal state. Now, when we order something in a game (eg Judo WAITIG), we interpret it in terms of the "commons" of our memory. But on this point of view, we analyze rare or can be seen directly by the absurd without the help or refer to our definition of "normal"? It is similar to what Rene Wellek tried to explain in an attack his essay "Literature" citing an example of the end of the game Samuel Beckett. Beckett has been portrayed by a game character and END "looking for sound of silence" (13). No artist can dissatisfaction with language can be expressed in language. May be a disruption of the expression of indescribable, but can not break indefinitely, cann't be silenced simply as such. Needed, however, there must be a beginning and an end ... "(14).
This statement emphasizes the importance of this variation is also true in the case of the absurdity and futility is, as is true in the case of silence and music.
In this perspective, we can come to a decision that there is no sense of absurdity without normal life. But how can this apply to the point Go analyzed as follows:
Beckett tries to achieve through tampering through his characters, and things that are not normal (or at least common objects in a sequence of abnormal), there are still elements of absurdity is in every corner of the room. The boy, who does not recognize the Tramps 2 bring dowry message Go itself (as happens never go Dutt brings a message from the boy, or tramps achieve a message from the boy to go dowry, or speak the message has been homeless waiter brings them dowry Go, Go or pony receives a message from Tramps and many others can be absurd situation) and was one of the corner interpret the situation be other explanations are many in numbers: Go point .. Tramps expected or bums do not wait for dowry Go when they say they expect. Etc. etc.
When I want to say is that everything is working in the game is absurd elements. Can understand if what we call absurdity would be more natural and normal to feel was ridiculous. In fact, we can not express itself absurd and this is the nature of the misleading "absurd" because when we talk about something, it becomes a little bit different than what we originally to express. "The words, the world of the imagination, is an invention of the human mind. They are a part of the human lie" (14). For this reason, you need all these means of expression literature, which is misleading. That Roland Barthes in France therefore says, "Literature is a system of meaning misleading ... suggesting conclusively, but it did not appear to finally" (16).
Therefore all measures Beckett tried to make the game stands today is located within the boundaries of binomial fucking ridiculous and is and how this work is akin to one of these depends on what is the use of words and how to use them to determine the border.
This is why the game ".. the so-called esoteric avant grade make a direct impact on the audience and deep from condemns ..." (17), while we can not accept easily Critics game shroud early.
Martin Esslin writes, "because they face [prisoners] to a similar case in some respects to theirs? Maybe., Or perhaps because they were not sophisticated enough to come to the theater without preconceived ideas and expectations of ready-made, and therefore avoid the error that a lot of critics trapped established, which condemned the game for its lack of plot, development, characterization, suspense or plain common sense "(18). Of course, this is what we see as an attempt to define is silly silly. Similarly attempts have been made in many other past and present to create a common rare. For example, the movement of Dadaist. "Attempts have been made not only to expand the field of art, but to cancel the border between art and non-art. Music, used machines or street noise, in painting, uses stuck taped to the newspapers, buttons, medals and so on, or" found objects soup cans, wheels bikes, lamps, and a piece of exposed - fast. Latest craze is the "drilling", holes or trenches in the soil, and the paths through the corn field, sheets square of the tracks in the snow. A 'sculptor', Christo wrapped million square feet of plastic coast of Australia. Bicnnale least in 1972 in Venice, a painter, Gino de Dominicis, presented to the Mongolian picked up in the streets like a work of art in the poems have been concocted from Dadaists by drawing clippings in a bag at random and, more recently, have been produced poems computer and novel random (by Marc Saporta) has emerged, which can be replaced every other page in any order ... "(18).
Similarly, we can mention, for example, from pop culture so popular today by the younger generations, which were considered silly once. We even got to the conclusion that it can be seen in the light of this discrepancy theory of silence and music in this trial said in the beginning that everything we want to express (either "Mute" or "absurd") We need words to express themselves. But "can never be the word of something" (20). So that we can achieve any situation or Express, but we can not do all of that if we tried to do, the situation will not be the same. This is what we hear when we talk nonsense, so we can not be completely ridiculous expression, because there is no compromise exists.
At the conclusion of this, I think I have reached the "right place at the right time," because if I'm not mistaken, then you will meet the right thing, but if you get an error (as I will get nonsense) to be a good thing because our context. My attempt to criticism, "is an attempt to make us more reasonable"
No comments:
Post a Comment