Chris writes:
" I'm not sure that clarity vs. ambiguity is relevant to any of this -- if we
accept that clarity is just a momentary failure to recognize ambiguity"
Certainly if anyone thinks any work of art, or any utterance at all, is
"perfectly clear" he is failing to recognize ambiguity in this sense: He
doesn't
realize no two viewers contemplating the same work will be entertaining the
exact same notion.
But Chris appears not to appreciate that both clarity and ambiguity are a
matter of degree. Every work of art is a composite of many bits ("No work is
ever
just a single work.") I want many of my bits to be as clear as I can make
them, and I want other bits to tremble with ambiguity. If it's important that
viewers realize that Jack was in jail last year, or that Jill's current
ostensible terminal illness is real and not faked, I'll work to make those
"facts"
clear. But there are other times -- for example, as a character utters a
certain
line of dialog -- when I want viewers asking themselves, "I wonder what he
meant by that. Did he meanb&?" or "Does he really believe what he just
said?"
The distinction between the two is not irrelevant to the notions the writer's
work is occasioning, and his ability to recognize when a moment demands
clarity and when not is often essential to whether or not he has the effect he
wants.
**************
It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel
deal here.
(http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)
