Reflecting well on the essay Roland Barthes, "Le plaisir du texte of 1973, I would compare to the" pleasure of the text "the joy of music: the pleasure we experience in listening to a song is the same that you feel when you read a book, a story, a story.
Music also stimulates the brain regions that regulate feelings of pleasure as euphoric sexual excitement or the thrill of pleasure.
Barthes in his essay, he compares "the pleasure of the text with" carnal pleasure "according to the philosopher writing can be approached to the Kama Sutra text. It is the science of the pleasures of language, a set of practices.
The writing generates text, considered as examples of " ars erotica", because they wish to try the reader must ensure that the reader, to read a text, a song, a poem, try pleasure. For Barthes
a text is read with pleasure if it was written in pleasure.
The role of the writer is this: to write, if only because he feels like, in order that he is in the pleasure of writing to enhance the pleasure of the reader. A goal is not easy to hit, because even a written text in pleasure, can not send anything to the reader (the pleasure is very subjective). The reader goes task of seeking pleasure in a text creandosi " space of enjoyment."
the contrary, if the text is boring we tend to say that it was written out of any enjoyment. It will be a text that stutters, as if the writer, writing, had made a speech to infants (one of the reasons why a simple text stutters about the need to write the writer).
We have mentioned the comparison between the "pleasure of the text with" carnal pleasure. "
Barthes calls "the most erotic part of the body, is not that where the suit is unfolding?". What does it mean?
tells us that the pleasure we are given by the 'intermittently. If the body can enjoy, for example, when we are faced with an 'appearance-disappearance, when we see that the skin that shines between two leaders, as one of the gloves and the sleeve, between the shirt and pants, etc.. (I see / I do not see).
In the case of the text wants to tell the reader feels pleasure when a text skip descriptions, considerations, explanations, as if trying to speed up a strip-tease, to get to see the sex of the dancer is like abolishing the suspense narrative is that it makes us feel with my heart in my throat and pushes us to read a book until the end to know how the story ends.
Yet this is precisely what gives us the pleasure of reading a text: the number of scratches that the reader does.
Returning to the comparison I want to expose, we can say that the "comparison-relation" that exists between the writer and the reader, may be there between the artist and the listener.
The music can create in us pleasure, can get bored, can be heard with little attention or what Barthes, as regards the text, called " suspense fiction", for example, this can happen when you listen to a new song, and it creates excitement because we are in a sense, will be curious to know how the chorus, or the second stanza, or the end of that particular song.
What they do not coincide between reading a text and listen to a song, regards to skip some parts. It is unlikely that we can skip parts of a song, unless we fail to listen because we are too distracted or bored because the song there. We think in this case the "text stuttering" proposed by Barthes to readers: a song can get bored, so it encourages us to listen carefully to the lyrics and the music of the song. We will say then that he can "babble", probably because the artist who did not write it consists in pleasure.
A song that gives us pleasure excites us, makes us relive the beautiful moments of our lives as if we were immersed in a dream.
is as if, while listening to that song, we entered into an unreal world, where nothing makes us feel bad, we can only "then" say that we are surrounded by the deepest pleasure. The music, like pleasure, satisfaction, and euphoria, and satisfaction.
also Barthes, in "The pleasure of the text, makes a distinction between pleasure and enjoyment. The
enjoyment is lacking, it is a loss, disturbs the reader who loses consistency of its "I". Thinking back to music in all its forms, the enjoyment is the same which comes from dance while dancing one "unifies" so much that you quit, as is often said, by " normal limits." The dance can thus be linked to the enjoyment with it because you lose the consistency of his own "I". In this case, specify that the relationship is between music and the dancer (or dancers), not more of the artist 'el' listener.
Finally, Barthes considers the text of pleasure as a speakable text, unlike the text of enjoyment defined, as well as text unspeakable, unbearable and impossible text. In fact, you can move on the first criticism, but the second can not be discussed.
Angela RapanÃ
0 comments:
Post a Comment