There are, in the literature of aesthetics, papers that touch on this. Sometimes they call it "linear art" (which tends to mix it up with a specific kind of visual art), sometimes "temporal art". Some genres, like music, get called "temporal" because they necessarily take time to "experience". Like a movie, they have to "unroll", as distinguished from, say, a painting in which the artist presents everything at once. Thus all storytelling is temporal. The temporality of music is somethng that always made me skeptical of the remark attributed to Mozart in which he allegedly said he sees a new work entirely in an instant.
Agreed, the "And then?" appetite is crucial to the success of most storytelling, but, of course, Aristotle would claim there are much more profound yearnings at work in the plays he admired most -- and much more profound satisfactions than just that of knowing "how it turns out". In a message dated 5/1/08 4:51:03 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > [Note to Derek. Don't read any further--go sulk in your tent, > listening to jazz or Mozart or a Malraux book on tape.] > > On May 1, 2008, at 3:19 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > But what I seem to be arguing there is that the alleged a.e. from > > theatrical > > drama is closer to sports than to a painting. As is the a.e. from > > dance. > > Similarly the a.e. from music is closer to that from dance than to > > the one from a > > painting. And are the a.e.'s from DiMaggio and from music closer > > than either > > is to the a.e. from a painting? > > > > I see, in comparing a sports event to a play, the similarity of > temporal suspense. Will it work, will he catch it, etc.? It's the > heuristic principle at work the first go around, inciting you to want > to know what comes next, and it's the same in watching a play, > listening to music, or any other temporal event. And then when you > watch it later--game or play, song or dance--since you already know > what's coming next, you can attend more closely to what preceded the > end, how things led up to the completion. > > Paintings and (to a large degree) sculptures are not that way at all. > They are all end-in-the-beginning, all-at-once experiences, from which > you drag out a minimal amount of temporal expectation. (Sculptures > have a bit of a time dimension, where the viewer can walk around it > and see things that cannot be seen simultaneously with other parts.) > > > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | > Michael Brady > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ************** Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL Food. (http://food.aol.com/dinner-tonight?NCID=aolfod00030000000001)
