I guess its very easy for people to mix up the genres of a text, because people are able to create text in so many different ways now,  that they don’t always follow concise definitions.

Ryan writes that ‘The receiver’s recognition [of a text] leads to the judgment whether the text is narrative or not, and that ‘any semiotic object produced with the intent to evoke a story [of the audience]’. This is related to my last week’s post about Ballet mecanique, an abstract movie, being able to narrate because it was causing me to wonder what was in the author’s head when he was creating the movie.

Bogost who says that lists work differently than literature because ‘literature aspires for identification’ Roland Barthes’s auto-biography list does not cause the reader to identify him but identify also his surroundings. This comes down to this week’s video assignment “Things and places that defines you” and I’ve been thinking what defines me. Does it create an identification for me too? I believe that what surrounds a person does identify him / her in a way that it has influenced the individual, and created this sort of public profile that people know, and they can associate it with other people who were defined by the same places. Eg: I studied at RMIT. Because of Roland Barthes’s description of the list of thing he likes and dislikes its easier to imagine what kind of person he was. Eg: unfaithful, because he dislikes fidelity, but also was a romantic, because he liked romantic music. So in a way it does identify… doesn’t it?