Why does it disturb us that the map be included in the map and the thousand and one nights in the book of the Thousand and One Nights? Why does it disturb us that Don Quixote be a reader of the Quixote and Hamlet a spectator of Hamlet? I believe I have found the reason: these inversions suggest that if the characters of a fictional work can be readers or spectators, we, its readers or spectators, can be fictitious. In 1833, Carlyle observed that the history of the universe is an infinite sacred book that all men write and read and try to understand, and in which they are also written.
✖ Via “Partial Magic in the Quixote” by Jorge Luis Borges, reproduced in Labyrinths: selected stories & other writings, tr. by James East Irby, New Directions Publishing, 2007, p. 196

This could be read as an epigraph to Bertrand Russell’s type theory.



• Jun 11, 2010 link notes tagged: art  book  novel  fiction  author  spectator  reader  theater  representation  reflexivity  self-consciousness  type  token  class  logic  Russell  Borges  map 

skandalon


1 2



ARCHIVE / TUMBLTAPE / RSS / CONTACT / Theme based on D&D