Torgeir is kind enough to provide a link to Dylan's speech, so rich in
meta-implicatures as it was, as delievered by the ambassador (did you notice
all the gaps in the ambassador's speech to indicate where each implicature
fell? My favourite was his pause after 'skull'. I suppose Dylan provided 'stage
directions' for the reading -- "Or he didn't," as McEvoy might observe -- he's
a Popperian).
McEvoy: "From the site referenced by Torgeir: >Not once have I ever had the
time to ask myself, "Are my songs literature?" So, I do thank the Swedish
Academy, both for taking the time to consider that very question, and,
ultimately, for providing such a wonderful answer.> The emphasis, missing from
JLS's version, may be important to the sense here. Also important may be the
reference to Pearl Buck."
Yes. I confess that I did not see much emphasis on the ambassador's
implicature, but I get McEvoy's point. Ambassadors are not perhaps the best
implicature carriers, but perhaps they are. "Literature" is a very technical
notion. In Greek, it was "grammatika". The gramma being the letter. When Cicero
was fighting with educating the Romans he said, "We cannot have 'grammatica',
it sounds puerile; I propose "literature" instead." Cicero's implicature being
that 'litera' is more or less like a Greek gramma, only native Roman. Cicero,
alas, overpassed the reference to Buck.
McEvoy: "Dylan treds a very Dylan line." This sounds analytic.
"I think an implication of that [Dylan] line [that Dylan is treading] is that
maybe the issue of whether or not his songs are "literature" is, in many ways,
not very important - even though on this occasion he finds the positive answer
given wonderful. At least that's what Bob told me." You were lucky. Grice notes
that the most important philosophical distinction is between
ii. What you are told
and
iii. What you are merely given to be understood via implicature.
Or if you want to use the case in point:
iv. Dylan tells.
and
v. Dylan implicates.
The fact that what Dylan TOLD McEvoy Dylan merely IMPLICATED to the rest of us
-- excluding perhaps the ambassador -- is, er, telling, not to say
'implicatural'. It may to to review some of the extra meta-implicatures. (THE
ambassador, implicating in lieu of Dylan):
i. Good evening, everyone. ----> This is not happening during the morning, or
even the afternoon. "Good" is not 'factive', but desiderative. Implicature: "I
wish you a good evening". "Everyone" implicates, "here present", but this is
cancellable ("all of you around the world, and other planets"). "I extend my
warmest greetings to the members of the Swedish Academy and to all of the other
distinguished guests in attendance tonight." Implicature: an evening is like a
night. But while we have "tonight", we don't have "toevening". Odd. "I'm sorry
I can't be with you in person," -- Implicature: "I'm am ambassador in
disguise". "but please know that I am most definitely with you in spirit and
honoured to be receiving such a prestigious prize."
The phrase 'spirit' implicates Greek 'psyche', which the Romans translated as
'anima,' or 'animus', on occasion. The reference is to the well-known
philosophical distinction between 'the spirit and the letter'. Also to 'body
and soul'. "Not in body, but as a disembodied spirit". For Strawson, 'person,'
that Dylan uses ("Sorry I can't be with you in person"), is a COMPOUND of hyle
and morphe (hylemorphism), where the body is the matter, and the shape is the
spirit. So Dylan may be implicating that hylemorphism is wrong, or at least
Strawson's conceptual analysis of it.
"Being awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature is something I never could have
imagined or seen coming. From an early age, I've been familiar with and reading
and absorbing the works of those who were deemed worthy of such a distinction:
Kipling, Shaw, Thomas Mann, Pearl Buck, Albert Camus, Hemingway." As McEvoy
notes, this name dropping is important. My favourite was of course Hemingway.
Philosophers are considered in Sweden litterateurs -- Russell got one, Grice
and Popper didn't. Note the extra implicature that the names are dropped NOT in
alphabetical order, and that Mann, Buck, and Camus, are the only three that get
a first name. The implicature being that there are other Hemingways who wrote
other than Ernest.
"These giants of literature whose works are taught in the schoolroom, housed in
libraries around the world and spoken of in reverent tones have always made a
deep impression." Implicature: on those who read their books. This is
cancellable. I can imagine a child who sees that his parents have "The complete
works of Thomas Mann" on the mantelpiece, and this fact 'making a deep
impression' on the child, without ever reading Mann. Note incidentally that
Dylan does not mention the author that is found on most households'
mantlepieces, Shakespeare, because Shakespeare never got the Nobel (the
meta-implicature is that like Schillp's in "Library of Living Philosophers".
"We cannot compile a volume on Dilthey. He is dead!").
"That I now join the names on such a list is truly beyond words. I don't know
if these men and women ever thought of the Nobel honour for themselves, but I
suppose that anyone writing a book, or a poem, or a play anywhere in the world
might harbour that secret dream deep down inside. It's probably buried so deep
that they don't even know it's there." This is an implicature to Freud and his
theory of the subconsciousness.
"If someone had ever told me that I had the slightest chance of winning the
Nobel Prize, I would have to think that I'd have about the same odds as
standing on the moon." Implicature: probability less than 0.5
If McEvoy is right in focusing on Dylan's choice of Pearl Buck, it is also
interesting that he (Dylan) chose the verb 'stand' (not 'walk') and, of all
satellites and planets, the closest one to Earth, to wit: the moon. "In fact,
during the year I was born and for a few years after, there wasn't anyone in
the world who was considered good enough to win this Nobel Prize." Implicature:
Neither was there in the moon.
"So, I recognize that I am in very rare company, to say the least." -- As
opposed to 'to say the most,' which is too hyperbolic to be Dylanian or
Griceian in implicature. "I was out on the road when I received this surprising
news, and it took me more than a few minutes to properly process it." "More
than a few minutes" implicates, for Geary, 'two hours, if not more'. It is
cancellable. As opposed to the rude "NOT more than a few minutes".
INTRODUCTION OF THE BARD TOPIC:
"I began to think about William Shakespeare, the great literary figure. I
would reckon he thought of himself as a dramatist. The thought that he was
writing literature couldn't have entered his head. His words were written for
the stage. Meant to be spoken not read."' Implicature: Shakespeare as
performance artist, keyword.
"When he was writing "Hamlet," I'm sure he was thinking about a lot of
different things: "Who're the right actors for these roles?" "How should this
be staged?" "Do I really want to set this in Denmark?" His creative vision and
ambitions were no doubt at the forefront of his mind, but there were also more
mundane matters to consider and deal with. "Is the financing in place?" "Are
there enough good seats for my patrons?" "Where am I going to get a human
skull?" Implicature: Does it have to be a "REAL" human skull, to use a
favourite adjective with McEvoy. Here the ambassador made a pause, and there
was Swedish laughter in the Swedish eyes.
"I would bet that the farthest thing from Shakespeare's mind was the question
"Is this literature?"" "Bet" is a trick of a performative verb for Austin, and
Dylan appropriately uses the 'would'. "I bet" sounds rude, in that it may
invite the ambassador being interrupted (and the lecture disrupted -- when
refreshments were to be served) with someone in the audience coming with "Bet
how much?" (The implicature of "would bet" is that Dylan does NOT bet.)
"When I started writing songs as a teenager, and even as I started to achieve
some renown for my abilities, my aspirations for these songs only went so far."
-- as they went, being the implicature. A vague implicature in that as Geary
may notify, it does not EXPLICATE how far is far. In "Grice without an
audience," it is claimed that if you utter x, you don't really care how far is
far.
Dylan: "I thought they could be heard in coffee houses or bars, maybe later in
places like Carnegie Hall, the London Palladium." -- where Flanagan and Allen
used to perform. Implicature: Dylan is NOT a double act.
Dylan: "If I was really dreaming big, maybe I could imagine getting to make a
record and then hearing my songs on the radio. That was really the big prize in
my mind." Note Dylan uses McEvoy's favourite word, 'really,' so perhaps this is
coming from McEvoy (who allegedly read a draft of this -- "Close that door! I
can't stand that draft!")
Dylan: "Making records and hearing your songs on the radio meant that you were
reaching a big audience and that you might get to keep doing what you had set
out to do." cfr. however, "Grice without an audience." "Surely when I write my
journal, "Dear Diary," I'm not expecting any addressee other than myself" --
"Logic and Conversation," lecture VI)
Dylan: "Well, I've been doing what I set out to do for a long time, now. I've
made dozens of records and played thousands of concerts all around the world.
But it's my songs that are at the vital centre of almost everything I do." The
'almost' implicates, "not all". He is also a father!
Dylan: "They seemed to have found a place in the lives of many people
throughout many different cultures and I'm grateful for that. But there's one
thing I must say." Implicature: if you can count it.
Dylan: "As a performer I've played for 50,000 people and I've played for 50
people and I can tell you that it is harder to play for 50 people. 50,000
people have a singular persona, not so with 50." Entailment: The 50 Swedes are
not a singular persona (note Dylan's use of the Ciceronian term) but fify
singular personae.
Dylan: "Each person has an individual, separate identity, a world unto
themselves. They can perceive things more clearly. Your honesty and how it
relates to the depth of your talent is tried. The fact that the Nobel committee
is so small is not lost on me." It used to have only 30 singular personae once,
the legend goes.
Dylan: "But, like Shakespeare, I too am often occupied with the pursuit of my
creative endeavours and dealing with all aspects of life's mundane matters.
"Who are the best musicians for these songs?" "Am I recording in the right
studio?" "Is this song in the right key?"" Implicature: We can always transpose
it, if my voice allows that.
Dylan: "Some things never change, even in 400 years." Implicature: Others do.
Dylan: "Not once have I ever had the time to ask myself, "Are my songs
literature?" So, I do thank the Swedish Academy, both for taking the time to
consider that very question, and, ultimately, for providing such a wonderful
answer. My best wishes to you all, Bob Dylan." Implicature: NOT the ambassador.
I agree with McEvoy that the choice of 'wonderful' as qualifying 'answer' is
wonderful, if that was McEvoy's implicature -- if it wasn't, I don't agree, the
implicature being. WONDERFUL, like hylemorphism, is an Aristotelian difficult
concept ripe for analysis. For Aristotle, philosophy begins with wonder. A
wonderful answer is thus, by entailment, an answer full of wonder. And so on.
Cheers
Speranza
*******
Dylan
i. Good evening, everyone. I extend my warmest greetings to the members of the
Swedish Academy and to all of the other distinguished guests in attendance
tonight. I'm sorry I can't be with you in person, but please know that I am
most definitely with you in spirit and honoured to be receiving such a
prestigious prize. Being awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature is something I
never could have imagined or seen coming. From an early age, I've been familiar
with and reading and absorbing the works of those who were deemed worthy of
such a distinction: Kipling, Shaw, Thomas Mann, Pearl Buck, Albert Camus,
Hemingway. These giants of literature whose works are taught in the schoolroom,
housed in libraries around the world and spoken of in reverent tones have
always made a deep impression. That I now join the names on such a list is
truly beyond words. I don't know if these men and women ever thought of the
Nobel honour for themselves, but I suppose that anyone writing a book, or a
poem, or a play anywhere in the world might harbour that secret dream deep down
inside. It's probably buried so deep that they don't even know it's there. If
someone had ever told me that I had the slightest chance of winning the Nobel
Prize, I would have to think that I'd have about the same odds as standing on
the moon. In fact, during the year I was born and for a few years after, there
wasn't anyone in the world who was considered good enough to win this Nobel
Prize. So, I recognize that I am in very rare company, to say the least. I was
out on the road when I received this surprising news, and it took me more than
a few minutes to properly process it. I began to think about William
Shakespeare, the great literary figure. I would reckon he thought of himself as
a dramatist. The thought that he was writing literature couldn't have entered
his head. His words were written for the stage. Meant to be spoken not read.
When he was writing Hamlet, I'm sure he was thinking about a lot of different
things: "Who're the right actors for these roles?" "How should this be staged?"
"Do I really want to set this in Denmark?" His creative vision and ambitions
were no doubt at the forefront of his mind, but there were also more mundane
matters to consider and deal with. "Is the financing in place?" "Are there
enough good seats for my patrons?" "Where am I going to get a human skull?" I
would bet that the farthest thing from Shakespeare's mind was the question "Is
this literature?" When I started writing songs as a teenager, and even as I
started to achieve some renown for my abilities, my aspirations for these songs
only went so far. I thought they could be heard in coffee houses or bars, maybe
later in places like Carnegie Hall, the London Palladium. If I was really
dreaming big, maybe I could imagine getting to make a record and then hearing
my songs on the radio. That was really the big prize in my mind. Making records
and hearing your songs on the radio meant that you were reaching a big audience
and that you might get to keep doing what you had set out to do. Well, I've
been doing what I set out to do for a long time, now. I've made dozens of
records and played thousands of concerts all around the world. But it's my
songs that are at the vital center of almost everything I do. They seemed to
have found a place in the lives of many people throughout many different
cultures and I'm grateful for that. But there's one thing I must say. As a
performer I've played for 50,000 people and I've played for 50 people and I can
tell you that it is harder to play for 50 people. 50,000 people have a singular
persona, not so with 50. Each person has an individual, separate identity, a
world unto themselves. They can perceive things more clearly. Your honesty and
how it relates to the depth of your talent is tried. The fact that the Nobel
committee is so small is not lost on me. But, like Shakespeare, I too am often
occupied with the pursuit of my creative endeavours and dealing with all
aspects of life's mundane matters. "Who are the best musicians for these
songs?" "Am I recording in the right studio?" "Is this song in the right key?"
Some things never change, even in 400 years. Not once have I ever had the time
to ask myself, "Are my songs literature?" So, I do thank the Swedish Academy,
both for taking the time to consider that very question, and, ultimately, for
providing such a wonderful answer. My best wishes to you all, Bob Dylan.
****
