Articulation of an interactive model of literariness calls for separate specification of (a) a text’s perceptible mode of representation, (b) a reader’s mode of engagement with a text so perceived, and (c) the generative (e.g., creative, expressive) effects of the interaction between this mode of representation and mode of reader engagement. We present a model that identifies two aspects of metaphoric textual representation: structured sequences of nominal metaphors and quasi-metaphoric structures with optional metaphoric construal. This model also distinguishes two modes of reader engagement: expressive enactment and integrative comprehension ( Kuiken & Douglas, 2017 ). The generativity of literary reading is located especially within the interplay between expressive enactment and sequences of metaphoric (and quasi-metaphoric) modes of representation. Evidence suggests that readers reporting expressive enactment also report inexpressible realizations and a temporal progression leading through epistemic tensions that comprise “living metaphor” ( Ricoeur, 1981 ). Thus the generativity – and aesthetic effects – of literary reading are found within the departures from conventionality that comprise the emergent meanings of complex metaphoric structures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kuiken et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: