Interpretation, theatrical performance, and ontology

Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism

Volumn 59, Issue 3, 2001, Pages 313-316

  Carroll, Noël ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 61049339678     PISSN: 00218529     EISSN: 15406245     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1540-6245.00029     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (6)

1. See Noël Carroll, "Towards an Ontology of the Moving Image," Film and Philosophy, ed. Cynthia Freeland and Tom Wartenberg (New York: Routledge, 1995)
2. Noël Carroll, "Defining the Moving Image," in my Theorizing the Moving Image (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1996)
3. and Noël Carroll, "The Ontology of Mass Art," in my A Philosophy of Mass Art (Oxford: Clarendon, 1998)
4. See my "Defining the Moving Image," pp. 68-69, and "The Ontology of Mass Art," pp. 213-214
5. Mitchell says that when she works on an old play, she looks up the etymological root of every word in the text. See Gabriella Giannachi and Mary Luckhurst, eds., On Directing: Interviews with Directors (New York: St. Martin's Griffin, 1999), p. 95
6. For an account of contemporary rereadings such as these, see Amy S. Green, The Revisionist Stage: American Directors Reinvent the Classics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994). I should also note that my understanding of interpretation is not so broad as to count Aimé Césaire's A Tempest or Heiner Müller's Hamletmachine as interpretations of Shakespeare, since each is an original play in its own right