Pangrammaticon's Stage Paradox Funtimes What?
If the first play is about actors backstage at a performance of Hamlet, and the second play (on the other side) is about actors backstage at a performance of a play about actors backstage at a performance of Hamlet... won't they all just be wearing costumes from Hamlet? Perhaps I am misunderstanding the question. And also, if every time an actor walks through the door from one stage to the other he is really walking to the backstage of the play he just left, wait... won't that just regress infinitely? And change the nature of the play(s) each time? I think it would be impossible, but not because the actors would have nothing to wear. What if the play isn't Hamlet, and we don't have any "real" play referenced that's never actually performed? And instead the first play (Play A) is just a play about backstage in Play B, and Play B is just a play about Play A's backstage. That is just manipulating the two plays to fit together, though... and then, then what would the actors wear? Backstage clothes? Ohhhh, that's when they wouldn't have anything to wear! Because there would be no costuming, because there would be no "stage," there would only be backstage and backstage. When there is no assumed/understood/fictional play somewhere, that is when the two backstage plays can't work. Wait, what was the point of this? I agree?
The sign of backstage must have the content of (or just reference to) a play and a (front)stage. Otherwise the performed-backstage is an empty performance, a sign lacking content, something we can't make sense of/express/write because part of the proposition of "backstage" is "stage."
To perform or write two plays set on two backstages but with no other "real" play is impossible. There has to be a play somewhere informing the costuming of the backstage plays: how they will be performed. To conceive of senses with no propositional content is impossible. There has to be a proposition somewhere informing the expression of the senses.
Almost, not quite, almost. Wait, no, not almost either.
The sign of backstage must have the content of (or just reference to) a play and a (front)stage. Otherwise the performed-backstage is an empty performance, a sign lacking content, something we can't make sense of/express/write because part of the proposition of "backstage" is "stage."
To perform or write two plays set on two backstages but with no other "real" play is impossible. There has to be a play somewhere informing the costuming of the backstage plays: how they will be performed. To conceive of senses with no propositional content is impossible. There has to be a proposition somewhere informing the expression of the senses.
Almost, not quite, almost. Wait, no, not almost either.
<< Home