Slide 1 - Dario Compagno - Personal Website by chenboying


									One, none, a hundred thousand diverse interpretations

“It arrives at the most extreme conclusions, the farthest consequences”
Luigi Pirandello

One, no one & one hundred thousand: - Two Model Readers

- Critique of „popular
Pirandellism‟ as a form

What is told, in brief
Vitangelo Moscarda, the search for the self The trial and the point of view of the community The farthest consequences: becoming no one


First person, 5 years later

Limping writing style
Many speculations about the facts Enounced enunciation


“For you, what does being alone mean? To remain in your own company, with no outsider around. Ah yes, I assure you this is a fine way of being alone.”


“And I am pleased that just now, as you were reading this little book of mine with the somewhat mocking smile that has accompained your reading from the start, two visits, one inside the other, occurred suddently to show you how foolish that smile of yours was.”

Textual Levels

Discourse / Fabula, 1
Predominance of the discourse over the fabula Enounced enunciation: reduces the distance between the Narratee and the Model Reader The Narrator‟s point of view: – He is a social loser but a moral winner – His motif were his philosophical reflections, not love – He fell in love with Anna Rosa only at the end of the novel

Narrator vs Model Author
Narrator and Model Author – Lies – Irony – Untrustworthy narrator

Do the Narrator and the Model Author share the same standpoint?
Is there only one possible way to read the book?

Pirandellism on the Stage
• First Model Reader: The Model Author endorses what the Narrator says • Second Model Reader: The Model Author doesn‟t endorse what the Narrator says

A direct attack to Pirandellism would reject it; A self-critique of Pirandellism completely accepts and applies it

Discourse / Fabula, 2
• Predominance of the fabula over • Dida‟s point of view: the discourse – Moscarda is a social and moral loser • Enounced enunciation: increases the distance – His motif was his between Narratee and constrained love for Model Reader Anna Rosa – His „philosophy‟ was only folly

Deconstruction or Interpretation?
The second Model Reader depends on the first, it is its counterpart

A simpler reading would show just a contraddiction between enounced and enunciation

“A parenthesis, necessary for all”, 1
“Past realities. If the facts are not so serious, these past realities we call undeceivings. Yes, agreed; because truly every reality is a deceit. That same deceit that now makes me say to you that you have another in front of you. «You‟re mistaken!» We are very superficial, you and I. We don‟t delve deeply into the joke, which is more profound and rooted, dear friends. And it consists in this: the human being acts necessarily through forms, the apparences he creates for himself, to which we give the value of reality…”

“A parenthesis, necessary for all”, 2

“The capacity of deluding ourselves that today‟s reality is the only true one, on the one hand, sustains us, but on the other, it plunges us into an endless void, because today‟s reality is destined to prove delusion for us tomorrow; and life doesn‟t conclude. It can‟t conclude. Tomorrow if it concludes, it‟s finished.”

Eco U. 1979, Lector in fabula, Bompiani: Milano Eco U. 1990, Six walks in the fictional woods, Harvard: Cambridge (MA)‫‏‬ Genette G. 1972, Figures III, Seuil: Paris Greimas A. & Courtés J. (eds.) 1979, Sémiotique. Dictionnaire raisonné de la théorie du langage, Hachette: Paris Pirandello L. 1986, Tutte le opere, vol. II, Mondadori: Milano Pirandello L. 1992, One, No One & One Hundred Thousand, trans. by Weaver W., Marsilio: New York

To top