Talk:Diegesis

message: Sounds interesting, can you give us a few samples of Stephen King's technique? It would amplify your para. Dieter Simon 23:31, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Diegesis in literature 

message: I think that actual Hollywood types use "source music" more often than "diegesis"... AnonMoos 18:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Source music"

message: Where did the WikiProject inclusion request come from on this page; there is no discussion here? Rykalski 19:11, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It originated with an unregistered editor (89.241.163.125) who inserted an "expert" template. Probably couldn't read anything more abstruse than an average essay. Sorry, I get a bit bitter about that sort of template. Dieter Simon 22:27, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Could we remove it? Rykalski 14:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Have removed it. It is one thing to substantiate statements made in the article by citing sources, but it is another to throw the whole into doubt by inserting an "expert" template. Have removed it and am endevouring to find the sources for the Platonic, etc. involvement. Dieter Simon 23:27, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expert Request 

message: Is it worth adding a section on Tarantino as music that shifts between the diegetic and non-deigetic is one of his trademarks and given his popularity it is in his works that a lot of people are going to come across this concept? Rykalski 10:57, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tarantino 

message: There's ambiguity in the status of the harmonica theme in Once Upon a Time in the West.  At the end of the first scene, the three goons turn their back on the train from which no passenger has descended; then they turn to see the nameless hero standing on the far side of the track.  Why did they turn?  They heard him play the harmonica – but the first two times I saw the movie I mistook it for non-diegetic.  The hero plays his theme in several later scenes, but there are also some shots where the theme is heard and he is seen not to be playing.  Does this belong in the list of anomalies?  —Tamfang (talk) 23:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Once Upon a Time in the West 

message: At the risk of reopening a rather heated debate, I have to second the above criticisms of this article. While I recognize the usage of 'diegetic,' as described by DionysosProteus, to be standard in cinema studies, I don't think such usage is entirely compatible with the Aristotelian meaning. I say this because while so-called 'non-diegetic' or 'extra-diegetic' material comes from outside the main narrative of the film, it is nonetheless narrative content if we adopt a strict Aristotelian division between mimesis and diegesis. It certainly isn't mimetic -- what could it possibly be enacting or embodying? On the other hand, it does play a role in narration, in the same way that editing and framing do; it directs the audience's interpretation of what they see on screen, and thus plays a secondary narrative role. Extra-diegetic music, for example, could be thought of as an 'auditory frame.' Therefore, from an Aristotelian perspective, it is best described as diegetic, even though film critics have chosen to describe it as extra- or non-diegetic. 
Again, I want to emphasize that I recognize that usage as valid; the meanings of words change, and I'm cool with that. But I think this article could be better about reflecting that change.
I think the essence of the problem can be found in DionysosProteus' assertion that
:In theatre, what cinema calls 'non-diegetic' is, in its theatrical equivalent, called 'non-mimetic'.
In other words, both terms mean 'stuff not arising from within the main story.' But this main story is being represented through mimesis in the case of theatre, and through diegesis in cinema. The problem is that all representation is at a remove in cinema -- you can never embody or enact a story through a medium like film -- so film critics had to come up with another word to describe things at an even further remove. 
I don't have any sources to cite, so I can't really say any of this in the article. But I believe the reasoning is sound. Solemnavalanche (talk) 20:25, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. There is a lot of OR and uncited stuff, which is now mostly concentrated in the "In film" section. I commented below ("Article is still confused"). But I don't think it should be deleted -- too interesting -- just fixed. 2001:171B:2274:7C21:A936:56A0:F7DE:FFED (talk) 10:29, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still Fuzzy 

message: "The term "meta-concept" is also used for some non-diegetic elements". This statement really needs sourcing and further definitions given. If no-one can cite any sources it will have to be removed as citations have been requested since March 2007. Dieter Simon (talk) 22:56, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:   Diegesis in role-playing games 

message: "Diegesis is multi-levelled in narrative fiction. Genette distinguishes between three "diegetic levels". The extradiegetic level (the level of the narrative's telling) is, according to Prince, "external to (not part of) any diegesis." One might think of this as what we commonly understand to be the narrator's level, the level at which exists a narrator who is not part of the story being told. The diegetic level or intradiegetic level is understood as the level of the characters, their thoughts and actions. The metadiegetic level or hypodiegetic level is that part of a diegesis that is embedded in another one and is often understood as a story within a story, as when a diegetic narrator himself/herself tells a story."
This is not what Genette wrote. Various levels of his theory are confused, e.g. the intradiegetic narrator is not necessarily more or less able to look into characters' minds. That is a matter of focalisation. Furthermore, crucial notions such as homo- and heterodiegetic narration are to even mentioned. A homodiegetic narrator is a character inside the story (who may appear or not), a special case of the homodiegetic narrator is the autodiegetic narrator (narrator=protagonist). A heterodiegetic narrator is not part of the world of the narration. Extra- and intradigegetic narrators are only applicable in a story with a frame narrative, in other words, when there are two narrators. E.g. "My mother used to tell me this story: (One upon a time....)"  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:6B:904:43C2:F07D:2C44:A9EE:CAD2 (talk) 09:41, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just very wrong 

message: I came across this term in wikipedia entry on Eraserhead:
The film also begins a trend within Lynch's work of relating diegetic music to dreams, as when the Lady in the Radiator sings "In Heaven" during Spencer's extended dream sequence. This is also present in "Episode 2" of Twin Peaks, in which diegetic music carries over from a character's dream to his waking thoughts; and in 1986's Blue Velvet, in which a similar focus is given to Roy Orbison's "In Dreams".[38]
So now I am doubly confused. If the term is in emerging use, does it only relate to sound/music in film and can historical examples be cited in the article please?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.20.69.204 (talk) 22:38, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah this article is utterly incomprehensible. But hey we came here from a David Lynch movie so I guess at least that is consistent! Gangweedersriseup (talk) 10:40, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  David Lynch reference 

message: "Diegesis" is completely misrepresented in the opening paragraph of this entry. Diegesis is not "a style of storytelling"; it simply means the fictional world of the story. The existing definition provides no sources, and frankly I'm baffled as to where they got that description of the term. KitePerson (talk) 18:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening paragraph needs to be rewritten