partnership presumes arbitrage

Dramatic work itself is a kind of the compression of an epic narrative text; therefore before being summarized and compressed it must be expanded so that the narrative contents would become comprehensible. It means that an epic text must be obtained from dramatic speech to make up a correct database for dramatic summary. It is not dramatic speech that can be summarized immediately; there must be an intermediary narrative preparation. The words of dramatic utterances remain enigmatic without being completed with narrative explanations given by an observer. Thus the initial task for drama’s description would become to transform conversation into narration. Therefore the paradox of compressing a dramatic text in a summary is that it itself gas to be regarded as a summary that needs expansion. Dramatic text as a metatext compresses an epic narration with the elimination of narrative ingredients and therefore demonstrates the paradoxical necessity of expanding while being described.

Respectively the description of drama presumes first of all the conversion of direct speech into indirect narration so that all the text seems ultimately to get the clausal structure of subordinate object clauses. Meanwhile the principal clause of this structure can by no means be restricted with the “(s)he says” phrases, and so the cues do that can’t merely become object clauses without further inferences. The most essential here is to retain the viewpoints of a conversation’s partners and their participation that contrasts to epic distance. Accordingly it goes about the necessity to render the intent of a person as the force determining the contents of a speech. We have already seen (1.4) that the contents of a narration can be described with titles and subtitles (in particular with nominative sentences taken as titles) ascribed to the described text by an observer. This approach wouldn’t be sufficient already to a monologue and still more to a conversational passage of a novel. Here together with a plot the characters come into play and must be taken into consideration.

Due to its dependence from character together with its function within a plot’s evolvement the direct speech is to be regarded as a periphrastic description of those things that are still to be guessed by an observer and to get direct designation. Direct speech can be said to be a cover or an envelope of this direct designation to be excavated by an observer so that the object acquires verbal masks. It is to stress that this periphrastic property of direct speech is redoubled: it presupposes not only the direct designation of contents and of respective object but also the personal location to the subject and the expression of intents. If in narration the purposes of the author of speech don’t demonstrate particular distinction in regard to its intentional load it is different in the case of direct speech where the tasks of utterances can deviate. The simplest example here can be found in a very widespread logical game of comparing the speeches of “liars” (those who constantly deceive) and of “truth-speakers” (who always utter verity). In conversational passages of a prosaic work this double periphrastic destination of direct speech depending upon plot and characters becomes especially evident. The most important contents and intents are still to be added by an observer to the words given in a conversation. As an example let be taken the passage from Ch. Dickens’ “Oliver Twist” (Ch. 18) with the conversation between Dodger, Bates and Oliver: D. (about O.): What a pity it is he isn’t a prig. B.: Ah! He don’t know what’s good for him. D. (to O.): I suppose you don’t even know what a prig is. O.: I think I know that it’s a thief. You’re one, are you not? D.: I am. I’d scorn to be anything else. Of course it is not the elucidation of the term “prig”, neither a seduction for Oliver to join the company. It is implied here the motif of PRIDE (as antonym to the mentioned “scorn”) with the declaration of appertaining to criminal underground as well as HUMILIATION in regard to the distanced Oliver who happened to be arrogant enough to attempt slightly to disapprove the suggestion of his ignorance. Besides, it is to observe that this passage contains the discussion of at least four points: 1) the supposed ignorance of the meaning of the word “prig”; 2) the indisputable preference of being “prig”; 3) the supposed disability of Oliver to be “prig”; 4) the implied invitation for Oliver to join the community “prigs”. All these items are to be regarded as the places of bifurcation in the decision-making process. It follows from here that each conversation is discussion.

The passage exemplifies the fact that it is insufficient to convert direct speech into indirect one (with object clauses): it will be necessary to make the contents & intents explicit and thus to replace periphrastic locutions with direct designations. It is not what is said in the partners’ cues but what really takes place in the conversation that the observer must narrate with own words. Direct speech is not only the event of a communicating some contents. It is first of all the revelation of characters attesting their intents as well as the moment of their development. Thus direct speech needs explanatory replacement to be described adequately, and it is such replacement that takes place in the samples of the summaries in libretti. Only after such outer replacement of direct speech having been carried out the description can be supplemented with the insertions of quotations. One can easily see that such textual preparations resemble the well known games with compiling a cento (as well as bouts rimées or les propos interrompus) built of textual fragments. New descriptive technologies make us return to those old devices fallen into oblivion so that cento becomes a real prototype of database together with its inversion of soliloquy. Textual insertions in an observer’s account of the described text build up such cento where the whole acquires the form of soliloquy.

Meanwhile the very opportunity of expanding a text returns us to the already discussed problems of replenishing vacuous spaces of lacunas & latencies to be replenished while developing textual expansion. Lacunas imply respectively the extensive way of expansion with filling up and adding the absent locutions. Amplification (as a decoration added to construction) can exemplify such extensive expansion. Latencies presuppose the disclosure with the intensive mental efforts of the exploration of the problems standing behind the utterance. Thus while expanding a text one has to bear in mind the existence of the places of ambiguity with such double (extensive and intensive) forms. For instance comments added to drama by s producer would be of extensive nature whereas the prompting implications made up by an actor for memorizing the role would become its intensive transformation. Latencies are “excavated” from inverted commas’ insertions distributed within the text and lacunas are represented with the unmentioned (though meant) details. The disclosure and replenishment of such places of ambiguity is the first step for the attributive analysis of scenic situations that can be exemplified with etudes.

Then one must find the inferences as to the intentions and achievements of those who speak. Thus dramatic dialogue is to be regarded as a kind of some latent conclusion especially in the form of the so called “heap” or sorites () that is to be disclosed in the clausal structure of arbiter’s explanatory text. Arbiter’s competence is to provide the presumption for reconstructing such conclusion. Therefore it is this competence that enables to disclose the uniting forces present in dialogue and making up its thorough axis. The existence of such conversational axis can be attested, for example, with French locutions “tenir le dé / faire les frais de la conversation”. It goes actually about such latent conclusion uniting disparate utterances by the partners. Such transformations presuppose in particular new representation of drama’s propositions regarded here as the members of clausal structure so that conjunctive words would supplement the initial text to make the new roles of the utterances explicit. Within such imaginary hypotactic structure that would render the supposed conclusion one can insert the cited circumlocutions that replace direct designations in direct speech and betray latent intentions of dramatis personae. The clausal structure gives pretext to regard such representation of direct speech as the already discussed big zeugma with clauses distributed among the partners of communication as in the case of integral text converted into a hypotaxis (in graphic representation it can be described with the aid of multiplied bracketing).

The unity of conversation is provided with the string of mediating terms analogous to medial inferences and terms in logical syllogisms in the manner of the representation of dialogue as the latent conclusion. Respectively it becomes necessary to find these mediate locutions that unite separate cues in the continuous conversational flow (in opposite to lyrical poem where such substantiation not only isn’t necessary but also must be hidden). In a very simplified form these medial terms can be said to designate the actual predicates of a conversation (or of a discussion) so that it would go about the communicative axis of a drama. The deterministic outlook of drama is marked with such explicit axis of key words that function as mediating terms and provide the substantiation of discussions. Dramatic determinism can be said to reveal itself through mediation. One could say of the prevalence of axial moments in drama and the laterality in lyrics.

In difference to central moments of textual field structure (associated usually with potentialities) that imply subordination the axial moments are indispensable for textual entity without special implications. In the same manner laterality doesn’t imply subordination in opposite to periphery and builds an independent concomitant line of complements to the axis. Lateral phenomena can be regarded to oppose to peripheral ones as the systematic vs. the sporadic. Laterality presupposes its own autonomous motivational filament while periphery remains dependent upon the subordinate relations to center and displays separateness only sporadically. Thus together with motivational analysis the idea of lateralization comes into play in view of the necessity of detecting latent motivational structure. The lateral environment represents the vestiges of motivation whereas axis represents motivation explicitly. The laterality can be said to become a track of vestiges attested within a textual strata that enables detecting latent motivation.

The principal distinction of each dramatic dialogue is just the conduct of a discussion where arguments are presented as to how to remove and disapprove doubts and lead dramatis personae to a decision. Such an argumentation is based upon predication that together with complements create a series of motifs. It is to seek in each scene for a culminating actual predicate that would direct all the decision-making process. One says of the common perspective of a conversation’s participants that is determined with the existence of superior task of dramatic action⁸⁸⁷ and coincides in fact with the axial filament of actual predicates giving the textual motivational filament. Moreover, this perspective or communicative axis is supported and reproduced by the participants purposely⁸⁸⁸. Respectively one needs to choose axial locutions to represent such conversational common basis⁸⁸⁹. In practice it goes about the row of motifs that are essential for the description of each direct speech, be it dialogue or monologue. The detection of such row can be exemplified with the analysis of A.P. Chekhov’s “About the Harmfulness of Tobacco”⁸⁹⁰. It is essential that such motifs are to be discovered & described with an observer’s own means and hardly can be represented with immediate quotation so that they become the result of reflection. It is also to stress that they intersect with what has been designated with the term of situation. It goes actually about the types and categories of situations that can be described with the motifs conceived in such way.

One can come to motifs (represented with respective taxis with complements) with having reinterpreted the circumscriptions and subsequently with removing the inevitable homonymy ensuing from their abstractedness. Such approach can be exemplified with the passage from A.N. Ostrovski’s drama «Светит, да не греет» (It gives light but not warm). There are here three scenes of the encounters and conversations between Olya and her unfaithful lover Rabachev (2.10, 3.4., 3.8) who has committed treachery with another person. The development of the axis of three species of “rheme” (actual predicates) is here to be traced: it is initiated with the declaration of LOVE, that comes to the pray of PITY, and the actual refusal entails the unmentioned though evident idea of DEATH that explains the suicide committed by Olya⁸⁹¹. Besides this obvious axis of this role the lateral filament is also to be traced that substantiates the fatality of the events. There appears the motif of the FAREWELL TO THE LONG-AWAITED that bears the ominous meaning in Olya’s replica⁸⁹². This fatality is supported with the triple negation in the last Olya’s words that approach still nearer the idea of death⁸⁹³. Thus the intention of suicide appears here long before being accomplished. In the same way one can find the series of motifs (represented as predicates + complements) in the role of Olga in drama “Блажь” (Caprice) where separate scene (1.9) enables summarizing the plot. The final conclusion looks like the equation TO FALL IN LOVE – TO BECOME WISER⁸⁹⁴. Meanwhile it is prepared with the sequence of GOVERNING (for the bridegroom with the manor) – DISMISSING (the manager) – ARRANGING (peacefully the affair) that contains the whole strategic program. Besides, there is still the latent idea of COGNITION⁸⁹⁵.

It is paradoxical that to come from dramatic text to its representation with the aid of epic narration one has also to replace the immanent dramatic and lyrical participation with epic distance appearing inevitably in each textual description. As a result the opinions and intentions of the participants of dramatic action would be included into arbiter’s competence. To transform direct speech into indirect would then entail also to change the respective viewpoints as far as partial knowledge would be replaced with the arbiter’s competence. Accordingly literal meanings of direct enunciations must be supplemented with what is known to the competent observer. As the result one has to expect that such direct literal enunciation would turn into circumlocutions referring to perfectly other things that they designate taken literally. This circumstance gives pretext for a somehow paradoxical conclusion as to the nature of analytical procedures applied for lyrical and dramatic texts: as far as such procedures presuppose distance from the represented textual object it must go respectively about transition to epics. Thus analytical epiphenomena as the explorative devices can be conceived as the epic satellites of dramatic or lyrical texts. Dramatic and lyrical texts are to be retold as epic narrations with the aim of their analytical representation. In particular it goes about the transformation to the mode of aphoristic text where the compression looks out as the transition to expanded epic account of the represented contents.

One can exemplify such analysis with the final scene from “Hamlet” where the Queen commits suicide⁸⁹⁶. It is to be reminded by an observer that in the preceding act Gertrude enters the room just in the moment when the King discloses his plan of poisoning Hamlet to Laertes. That entails the conclusion that she drinks the cup with the aim of rescuing her son. This intentional load makes the sense of all the locutions to be revised. Therefore [CAROUSING TO FORTUNE] means [RESCUING], the more so, as the deed has been accomplished in spite of the warning exclamations. Subsequently [TAKING NAPKIN] implies the hint to [BEMOANING] as far as the request of [RUBBING BROWS] obviously refers to [RUBBING TEARS] within the context of the deed. At last the conjecture (anyhow disputable) that it goes here about the intentional suicide can be substantiated also with Gertrude’s words about [PARDON] and her own [WILL]. Thus one encounters in the cited short passage a whole series of semantic shifts that give grounds to say of the periphrastic transformations of the locutions in question and respectively of the periphrastic interpretation of those given in text as the actual circumlocutions. To describe this scene (for instance, in libretto) one had to give explanations to the mentioned locutions thus inserting them in observer’s own text.

Besides, together with the removals of textual insufficiency with explanatory comments there is the factor of randomization to be taken into account. It is the consequence of dramatic textual heterogeneity of the same kind as the direct speech of dialogues. In its turn this heterogeneity renders the presence of chaos within the inner world of drama. It is the analytical procedures of endowing play with interpretative narrative explanations that enable the removal of this chaotic factor. It imparts the brightly fractional structure to dialogue in comparison to narration. These chaotic properties of dramatized texts are generally widely used in a kind of entertainments where occasional phrases are uttered by different persons so that a kind of absurd conversation with comic effect arises. Such game demonstrates the possibility for conversation to combine much more heterogeneous enunciations than it can be allowed for a coherent narration. In particular the exclusive direct speech gives pretext for the demands of common comprehensibility of utterances, at least for the dramatis personae; otherwise the very possibility of dialogue would disappear (or the effect of “a conversation of the deaf” would take place). Thus the minimum of sophistication becomes valid for drama in opposite to lyrics. Lyrical conventions make charades admissible whereas in drama they are intolerable already due to the restrictions of comprehensibility within the conversation between dramatis personae; the same concerns the species of hapax legomenon that do not agree with the comprehensibility as well as with dramatic colloquial preferences.

One has to bear in mind that the very existence of a poetic work within its interpretative activity is a permanent pulsation of compression in virtual imaginary summaries and expansion in its full version. Such pulsation is necessary already for a text’s comprehension. The alternate couple of compression vs. expansion can easily be seen in anecdotes as the minimal ultimate folds of dramas. It doesn’t concern comedies only, the anecdotic dialogues often retelling tragic and heroic events of history. The compression vs. expansion pair of procedures endow a text the properties of “respiration”. It is this vital pulsation of growth vs. shrinkage that becomes the form of existence of any text. One can’t take any text as something dead and rigid. Its very existence consists in growing and shrinking its essence and contents. Thus virtual commentary (amplification) and eliminations (abbreviations) constantly accompany the life of a text as a potentially infinite editorial process. One can’t actually decide when such editorial practice should be terminated to proclaim the obtained output as the only real variant that would represent text as a normal version. From stylistic viewpoint the transitions needed for summarizing a text can be represented as a kind of the mentioned periphrastic transformations. Respectively the explorative procedures can at the same time be regarded as the generative and derivative procedures exerting impact upon the text. It is also to mark here that digest serves as an auxiliary mnemonic prompt enabling adequate realization of idiomatic connotations and the disclosure of arbiter’s competence necessary to comprehend the contents of dramatic action. As such prompt for an actor’s staging practice data representation of drama in general can be regarded too. Thus it has also another special aspect for the use in performing arts.

It is in drama that always the additional question arises whether to agree or disagree with the statements reproduced in the stage in the sense whether to evaluate them as true or false taking into account the known or suspected intentions of the dramatis personae. It is an important distinctive feature in comparison to epics and lyrics while the analysis of intents comes into play as that exerting influence upon contents. Respectively it is the periphrastic interpretation of utterances as “verbal masks” of dramatis personae that becomes necessary for the disclosure of actual meaning and of respective motifs. This particular interrelationship of contents & intents determines the peculiarities of direct speech’s description as such “verbal mask”. It is due to this marked secession that it becomes irreducible to narration (in opposite to the case of equivalence of dialogue and monologue for the representation of textual entirety). As far as character come into play direct speech becomes its inseparable feature⁸⁹⁷. Due to this duplicity direct speech always refers to the presence of another latent person who reproduces the alien words.

It is here to remind that direct speech always implies the invisible or visible satellite of the author’s image and of author’s narration. In epics, in particular in novel this implied text becomes explicit: when direct speech appears it will come out that the author initiates implied dialogue with the hero as far as their voices display distinctive features. We have seen that the latent satellite takes place in pure narration as well. Meanwhile this satellite of explanatory comments is built of the observer’s metalanguage. It originates from the interpretative efforts of disclosing plot and composition of the narration that are not explicitly given in text and do only virtually exist. A different situation is to be found in the case of direct speech. One deals here with real presence of an author’s voice and not with virtual description (as in the case of plot and composition). In epics of novels this distinction of the voices of author and heroes is especially marked as the revelation of the distinctions of characters. At the same time in drama the author’s voice is reduced to the remarks (if any) so that the illusion can arise as if this voice (and the author’s image) were absent. Therefore the producer’s remarks can be said to revitalize this author’s latent presence in a text while being carried out in a performance. Thus one can say of multi-part musical score in regard to direct speech. Such multi-part structure is to be revealed in a narrative text as well due to interpretative efforts of observer. The difference is that in narration this multi-part score arises as the inherent property of textual inner dissociation. Therefore this structure of narrative texts proves to be nearer to polyphony. In direct speech the voices are of outer nature and resemble homophony. One could notice also that a pair of cues (as question – answer) in drama resembles a chord in multi-part homophony.

The validity of the controversy between plot and character for the case of direct speech entails essential consequences in regard to descriptive tasks. The identification of enunciation with a person that pronounces the direct speech gains importance in opposite to narration where intentional analysis coincides with the disclosure of the author’s purports and doesn’t presuppose their diversification. It is obvious that observer’s intrusion becomes necessary to carry out such identification. It follows from there a very particular structural peculiarity of direct speech where one deals with the phenomenon of “redoubled partiality”: the partiality according to