Piangere e ridere per finta
The so-called "paradox of fiction" stems from an attempt to explain what kind of emotions we feel towards the objects that we find in novels and movies, and which we know perfectly well to be fictitious. It is a classic paradox that came back to the fore in 1975, following the publication...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Rosenberg & Sellier
2015-12-01
|
| Series: | Rivista di Estetica |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://journals.openedition.org/estetica/548 |
| Summary: | The so-called "paradox of fiction" stems from an attempt to explain what kind of emotions we feel towards the objects that we find in novels and movies, and which we know perfectly well to be fictitious. It is a classic paradox that came back to the fore in 1975, following the publication of an article by Colin Radford. The article investigated precisely the tears we shed for what is not real (such as a fictional character). Why are we moved by Anna Karenina’s suicide if we know that it is not real? What is the difference between crying for Anna Karenina, crying for a lie, crying for depression and pretending to cry so that whoever looks at us thinks we are sincerely moved? In Piangere e ridere davvero (2009), Maurizio Ferraris offers an interesting theoretical proposal to dissolve the paradox in question and focuses on some fundamental distinctions regarding our emotional reactions to real and fictitious stimuli. This essay is inspired by Ferraris’ theory and aims to clarify what it means to pretend to emotionally respond to something in everyday life and what is the difference between these "fake" emotions and those we feel during the fruition of works that we know to be fiction. Fenaroli’s case (at the heart of the Italian news in the late fifties), Il vedovo by Dino Risi and Scusate il ritardo by Massimo Troisi are chosen as paradigmatic examples. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0035-6212 2421-5864 |