In Luhman's section on "Entertainment" he addresses something with which I both understand and agree. On page 56, he discusses the freshness of entertainment and how there is only a need to read something twice if one chooses to admire the writer's artistic ability or to study how a film was produced and directed. He argues that the excited and entertainment factor of a work is based on not knowing how to read or interpret it.
That is one of my personal struggles, especially in studying film. It seems a bit harder to take the full entertainment value out of a book or an article, but it is easy to take the 'ooomph' out of a film. This is a challenge I know I will face as I move onto the other side of the classroom table and it appears to be a pedagogical tightrope: how to have students/viewers gain the most from the film viewing experience without eradicating the entertainment factor. I like his challenge to Tieck as he counters with the notion that the evolution and resolution of tension affords the viewer/reader the opportunity to 'forget' and move on through the entertainment experience.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment