Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T12:31:01.608Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Trans-Semiotic Analysis: Shaggy Codes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 December 2021

Sylvere Lotringer*
Affiliation:
Columbia University

Extract

What I am proposing here in relation to the The Shaggy Dog Animation is not, strictly speaking, a semiotic analysis. Rather, I would call it if the term was not even more intimidating, because it does not exist yet, trans-semiotic. Any other approach, including traditional semiotics, could make sense—lots of sense—but I am convinced that sense, good sense, normal neurotic sense, is precisely what Shaggy Dog is up against. So should I enforce conformity by means of an already existing theory or alter the approach itself in order to record the impact of a specific production? This obviously raises a somewhat ethical question about the function of criticism. Can we devise a battery of approaches independently of the pieces they are meant to elucidate? Is it advisable to try to establish a “library” of methods that could be used eventually by other critics no matter what type of production they might intend to study?

Type
Analysis Issue
Copyright
Copyright © 1978 The Drama Review

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)