/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6615458]

Is there a name for the literary device where a description is not precise, but instead multiple different possibilities are offered? Borges uses it ALL the time, for example:

>the composition of a novel in the first person, whose narrator would omit or disfigure the facts
>contradictions which would permit a few readers - very few readers - to perceive an atrocious or banal reality
>He was tall, thin, Indian-like, with the inexpressive face of a mask or a dullard.

Sometimes the two adjectives offered are exact opposites, which produces a striking effect:

>Like all men of good taste, Menard abhorred these useless carnivals, fit only— as he would say—to produce the plebeian pleasure of anachronism or (what is worse) to enthrall us with the elementary idea that all epochs are the same or are different

I really fucking love it. I've also noticed it used in a few of Borges's predecessors, though not to such a great extent...are there any other authors who use it a lot?

As Borges wrote, "ambiguity is richness", which is why it works so well.

[Anonymous No.6615463]

>>6615458
Nice blog.

[Anonymous No.6615467]

>>6615458
i don't know but it really makes you realize that things we assume occupy opposite polarities actually contain each other within themselves -- wouldn't a banal reality be atrocious? aren't the atrocities of life so commonplace as to be banal?

[Anonymous No.6615473]

>>6615467
>i don't know but it really makes you realize that things we assume occupy opposite polarities actually contain each other within themselves
Did you think this was profoundly original thought? This is pretty trite. Proust was annoying about this.

[Anonymous No.6615506]

>>6615458
The closest thing I can think of I'd circumlocution, the use of more words than necessary when describing something. It could also be pleonasm which is essentially the same thing and common among unreliable narrators.

[Anonymous No.6615514]

>>6615506
This entire post is wrong.

[Anonymous No.6615542]

>>6615514
cir·cum·lo·cu·tion
ˌsərkəmˌləˈkyo͞oSH(ə)n/
noun
the use of many words where fewer would do, especially in a deliberate attempt to be vague or evasive.

ple·o·nasm
ˈplēəˌnazəm
noun
the use of more words than are necessary to convey meaning (e.g., see with one's eyes ), either as a fault of style or for emphasis.

Not completely.

[Anonymous No.6615548]

>>6615542
It has absolutely nothing relevant to OP's post, you mongoloid.

[Anonymous No.6615564]

>>6615548
It is of some relevancy. OP asked "Is there a name for the literary device where a description is not precise, but instead multiple different possibilities are offered?" I responded with what I thought was closest. And there's no reason to be rude.

[Anonymous No.6615575]

>>6615473
>>6615467

This is one of the central priciples of Hegelian dialectics.

[Anonymous No.6615583]

>>6615548

I agree that it would qualify as circumlocution. Definitely not pleonasm, though, as the latter requires some form of semantic redundancy.

[Anonymous No.6615626]

>>6615458
David Tibet uses it all the time in his poems, as well.

>your fingernails painted black or bloodred, i forget
>you may wait under a tree or at the foot of that hill
>and i wait for another revolution or revelation, it doesn't too much matter whether i see blood in wheals
>this starfish, this spider, most wretched and great

It always produces a really interesting effect in those situations. He seems to use it a lot more deliberately than most instances of it.

[Anonymous No.6617057]

>>6615467
I see you've read Demian and you're now a connoisseur of entry level duality of life

[Anonymous No.6617082]

>>6615458
Hendiadys?

[Anonymous No.6617098]

>>6615626
MY NIGGA MY NIGGA MY NIGGA

I wish David Tibet was air so I could breathe him. He's possibly one of the greatest lyricists of all time,a nd manages to convey powerful \moods in his music as well despite its thematic heaviness.

Like, when he whimpers
>Oh my dear christ
in Hitler as Kalki, the desperation in his voice is palpable. And just 6 minutes earlier he was assuming the role of a manic preacher, howling maddening sermons like
>AND ONE DAY THE WORLD SEES
>ONE DAY THE WORLD SEES
>HITLER AS KAAAAAALLLLLLLLLKEEEIEIIIIIIIIIIIIII

That's a GOAT photo too by the way.

[Anonymous No.6617320]

>>6615458
>>Like all men of good taste, Menard abhorred these useless carnivals, fit only— as he would say—to produce the plebeian pleasure of anachronism or (what is worse) to enthrall us with the elementary idea that all epochs are the same or are different
I see no contradiction, just a superfluous elementary and laziness after or.

[Anonymous No.6617351]

I'm doing that. Not so much in single sentences but the whole body of text is ambiguous to what it's really talking about. I think the goal is to make it so that it's both completely open to interpretation but the interpretations read the work as being extremely specific and personal to the reader. Take Poe's Conqueror Worm, for example. Some readers will take away from it that the worm is war, or hate, or pain, or death, or time, or depression, or distance from God, or whatever, and be absolutely certain that's what the poem is about. Poe might have had anything in mind when he wrote it, but what's great about it is that it can be whatever the reader's mind superimposes on it. I think "good literature" often is that which makes the most readers think that the author is writing about "them" or their experiences at least. Not always, but often.

[Anonymous No.6617600]

>>6617098
>tfw i have this
It's the most important thing that's ever been in my life.

Also, "An Ending" may be the most beautiful combination of words I've ever heard or read.

[Anonymous No.6617649]

Proust does it all the time, but often at much further divides - like Whether.. (one paragraph) or (another paragraph) or just (a third paragraph).

This instance - which isn't near as full of alternative as some - just sticks in my mind for the funny resolution

Françoise, who on the day of her arrival, when she still did not know anyone, would set all the bells jangling for the slightest thing ... nowadays, since she had made friends with a personage in the kitchen, which had appeared to us to augur well for our future comfort, were my grandmother or I to complain of cold feet, Françoise, even at an hour that was quite normal, dared not ring; she assured us that it would give offence because they would have to light the furnace again, or because it would interrupt the servants’ dinner and they would be annoyed. And she ended with a formula that, in spite of the ambiguous way in which she uttered it, was none the less clear, and put us plainly in the wrong: “The fact is . . . ” We did not insist, for fear of bringing upon ourselves another, far more serious: “It’s a matter . . .!” So that it amounted to this, that we could no longer have any hot water because Françoise had become a friend of the man who would have to heat it.

[Anonymous No.6617654]

>>6617649
a more compressed instance

On the other hand, when I instinctively recalled the good breeding which had so impressed me before, she filled me with a converse astonishment by her rude tone and manners typical of the ‘little band.’ Apart from these, her temple had ceased to be the optical centre, on which the eye might comfortably rest, of her face, either because I was now on her other side, or because her toque hid it, or else possibly because its inflammation was not a constant thing.

[Anonymous No.6617676]

>>6617649
I previewed the first 8 pages of Swann's Way earlier this week and I already know what you're talking about. The way he does it is really beautiful in my opinion, though. My copy of it is arriving tomorrow and I can't wait to start reading further.

[Anonymous No.6617678]

>>6615463
fuck off, this is the first interesting post I've seen on here in like a week.

[Anonymous No.6617688]

>>6615542
what OP's saying is that it's not more words than necessary, because what's necessary is to describe something imprecisely, or to triangulate something too precise for words to accommodate easily

[Anonymous No.6617700]

>>6617678

agreed. This is the most /lit related post on the board right now. Applauds eternally.

[Anonymous No.6617700,1]

why the fuck was this deleted