Mark Pizzato writes: "Anyone also interested in my question about the non-diegetic "chora" (image/sound womb) of film and theater? Or is that question also unclear? (Sorry for misspelling your name, Don Larsson.) To clarify, I'm questioning whether a non-diegetic sound track and uncanny imagery (cf. Zizek on Hitchcock) is actually outside the diegesis, or rather at its communal core--especially if the allure of the diegetic world is thus increased? (This might be done either to draw us towards an unconscious horror, as with Artaud/Hitchcock, or to repel us with more conscious incongruity, as with Brecht/Godard.) Does such a comparison of theater and film seem valid to the members of this list?" This is an interesting question that bears further thought. Strictly speaking, the "diegesis" of any narrative is one that is mainly reconstructed by the reader/viewer in any medium, but extradiegetic elements--as some have noted earlier--can be quite ambiguous at times. Since the chorus originally evolved out of the practices that Aristotle labled "mimetic" (in drama) as opposed to the "diegetic" means of telling stories (eg. Homer's epics), it does make the use of the term somewhat problematic. If we take "diegetic" as the "imagined story-world" of the narrative, in theater we can see distinctions. The chorus in OEDIPUS THE KING is made of citizens of Thebes and interacts (as it often does in Greek tragedy). On the other hand, the Chorus of Shakepeare's HENRY V is not a part of the action but seems to function as a kind of narrator/presenter of the material, encouraging us to widen our imaginations beyond the confines of the Globe theater to go to Agincourt, etc. In OUR TOWN, on the other hand, the Stage Manager fulfills a similar kind of chorus/narrator function, but from time to time interacts with the characters in the diegesis as well. What, then, do we make of the "chorus" that begins and ends Kurosawa's THRONE OF BLOOD? It sets a scene and delivers the "argument" of the piece for us and concludes it with a moral, but exists only as a set of disembodied voices. In Robert Bolt's original play of A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS, several minor characters are played by a single actor, representing a kind of Everyman. This multiple role was dropped in the film with Paul Scofield, though I believe it was maintained in the TNT production with Charlton Heston. At the least, "diegetic" and "nondiegetic" are--like so many of the categories we use to discuss these things--separate boxes, but boxes with permeable walls. Don Larsson, Mankato State U (MN) ---- To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]