To analyze the book- object, Gerard Genette’s concept of paratext is employed as a general framework. Grounded on the premise that the formal characteristics of architectural books can be analyzed as objects of critical thinking in architecture, the aim of this research is to reveal the fragmented nature of “architectural thinking” that brought the book-object of the anthology Architecture Theory Since 1968 into existence. Michael Hays’s anthology on theory of architecture Architecture Theory Since 1968 published in 1998. The subject and the object of this research is K. It seems as though many contemporary authors are playing with the physicality of books and with paratext as a way to remind readers why the book, as a physical object and narrative vehicle, is important.Tezin Yürütüldüğü Kurum: Orta Doğu Teknik Üniversitesi, Mimarlık Fakültesi, Mimarlık Bölümü, Türkiye It is unfair to suggest that these are the same thing, especially in instances where the book as a physical object can be used as a narrative device. In the increasingly digital world of text, the act of reading is regularly distilled from reading a book to simply reading its words. As I examine the books that break expectations, I argue that the disruption of normal reading patterns in the case of these texts creates additional avenues for discovery of clues and narrative objects, and that finding narrative clues in this manner is more rewarding and accessible than finding clues via the use of extra-textual knowledge. I discuss in detail how these expectations are formed and why they exist, how they interact with one another, and which texts break them, such as Julio Cortázar’s Hopscotch, Italo Calvino’s If on a winter’s night a traveler, David Foster Wallace’s Infinite Jest, Doug Dorst’s S, and Mark Danielewski’s House of Leaves. However, contemporary authors have been using the physical structure of the book and the paratext to disrupt the expectations general expectations readers might have entering a novel. Of course, it is unfair to suggest that authors do not regularly place clues inside the text, however, the detection and understanding of these clues are informed by what the reader and the writer have seen occur in other works of fiction therefore, the proper application of these clues is not always intuitive, as Mendelsund suggests. In what author Peter Mendelsund ( What we See When we Read) refers to as “the game of reading novels,” predicting what will happen in a text requires foreknowledge on the genre, date of publication, style of the author, and so on: “The rules are codified-but occasionally counterintuitive to the unexperienced.” Through the examination of Chekhov’s Gun (which states that an object introduced to the narrative is often a promise that it will be utilized) and Aomame’s Gun (as found in Murakami’s 1Q84, a Chekhovian Gun referenced so often that its use would cause the direction of the narrative to be too obvious) I explain how authors create ambiguity and mystery in text, and how the reader might properly predict what will occur based on knowledge that has come from outside text. Writing does not occur in a vacuum, and as such, reading cannot either. Thus, new readings patterns can be developed and access to new narrative devices and storytelling techniques becomes possible. However, contemporary novels that use the paratext for storytelling offer the same amount of accessibility to the reader while disrupting normal reading patterns. Intra-textual knowledge-that which occurs within the confines of the text-is more accessible, but still requires a great deal of foreknowledge to understand. Often, reading requires the use of extra-textual knowledge-that which comes from outside the book-to gain a proper understanding of the narrative. This paper examines how the physical and para-textual features (title, cover, front matter, page numbers, footnotes, glossary, etc.) of a book may be used as a vehicle for narrative discovery.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |