David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 69 (2):161-171 (2011)
Most theories of suspense implicitly or explicitly have as a background assumption what I call suspense realism, i.e., that suspense is itself a genuine, distinct emotion. I claim that for a theory of suspense to entail suspense realism is for that theory to entail a contradiction, and so, we ought instead assume a background of suspense eliminativism, i.e., that there is no such genuine, distinct emotion that is the emotion of suspense. More precisely, I argue that i) any suspense realist (...) theory must resolve the paradox of suspense, ii) if suspense is itself a genuine, distinct emotion, then in order to resolve the paradox of suspense it must be a radically sui generis genuine, distinct emotion, iii) according to any minimally adequate theory of the emotions, there can be no radically sui generis emotion, and so iv) there can be no genuine, distinct emotion that is the emotion of suspense. Quite simply, if a theory of suspense must entail suspense realism, then we ought to be eliminativists about suspense. This I call the Paradox of Suspense Realism, which I take to constitute a productive viability condition for any theory of suspense, i.e., any viable theory of suspense must be mutatis mutandis compatible with suspense eliminativism.
|Keywords||Suspense Emotion Eliminativism Aaron Smuts Robert Yanal Paradox of Suspense|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Aaron Smuts (2008). The Desire-Frustration Theory of Suspense. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 66 (3):281-291.
Christy Mag Uidhir (2011). An Eliminativist Theory of Suspense. Philosophy and Literature 35 (1):121-133.
Aaron Smuts (2009). The Paradox of Suspense. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 2009 (6.1):1-15.
Aaron Smuts & Jonathan Frome (2004). Helpless Spectators: Suspense in Videogames and Film. Text Technology 1 (1):13-34.
Richard J. Gerrig (1997). Is There a Paradox of Suspense? A Reply to Yanal. British Journal of Aesthetics 37 (2):168-174.
G. R. F. Ferrari (1999). Aristotle's Literary Aesthetics. Phronesis 44 (3):181 - 198.
Ferrari (1999). Aristotle's Literary Aesthetics. Phronesis 44 (3):181-198.
Björn Frank (2012). Economic Page Turners. Journal of Economic Methodology 19 (3):317-327.
Robert J. Yanal (1996). The Paradox of Suspense. British Journal of Aesthetics 36 (2):146-158.
Donald Beecher (2007). Suspense. Philosophy and Literature 31 (2):255-279.
John Henderson (1998). Virgil's Third Eclogue: How Do You Keep an Idiot in Suspense? Classical Quarterly 48 (01):213-.
Eleni Papagaroufali (2008). Carnal Hermeneutics : From "Concepts" and "Circles" to "Dispositions" and "Suspense". In E. Neni K. Panourgia & George E. Marcus (eds.), Ethnographica Moralia: Experiments in Interpretive Anthropology. Fordham University Press
D. W. Lucas (1939). Norman T. Pratt: Dramatic Suspense in Seneca and in His Greek Precursors. Pp. 120. Princeton: University Press, 1939. Paper, $2. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 53 (5-6):221-.
F. H. Sandbach (1934). G. E. Duckworth: Foreshadowing and Suspense in the Epics of Homer, Apollonius, and Vergil. Pp. Ii + 135. Princeton: Princeton University Press (London: Milford), 1933. Paper, 9s. Net. [REVIEW] The Classical Review 48 (01):38-39.
Added to index2010-10-22
Total downloads43 ( #77,629 of 1,725,833 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #348,700 of 1,725,833 )
How can I increase my downloads?