/lit/ - Literature

>>7858785
I personally find Wittmann's definition to be rather silly as it describes the narreme as a single instance altered irreparably as it moves forward, being replaced as the reader moves through, but that ignores the very temporal nature of the recipient themselves.

His definition only works if you suppose the recipient of a natomic structure is entirely at the whims of the one creating it. That they aren't natomic beings to begin with. Natomics is exploited by linguistic beings to achieve a middle-ground by which intents are actually transferred and PERFORMERS are aware of that, it's what makes them performers in the first place.

If everyone was really really shitty at words just all the time, only then does Wittmann get to be true.

Here's a second thread since we've only got seven posts left here: >>5257963