The Latin ‘provocare’ is a diagnostic standard of property. It refers to call-forth and challenge. The etymology of the term ‘consequences’ is older and more iterative. The compound ‘consequi’ ‘to follow after’ is elemental of the ‘com-’ ‘with’ + ‘sequi’ ‘to follow’. This is suggestive that consequence is the sequal to provocation and that narrative structure loosely corresponds with sequel – there is contiguity. In this instance the antonyms to description and lyricism. Such a supposition is crystalised in example 1.
The parallel lateral positioning of three extracts from the Tartan film ‘The King’ 4 illuminates the visual notation. Here you see how (a) pronouncement, (b) conjecture and (c) translation weave within themselves to summarise the architecture of consequence.
EXTRACT A: A pastor is ecstatic and laments to his congregation the musical prowess of his not so god-fearing son.
EXTRACT B: The son takes it upon himself to alter his situation with Christ through lyricism, eroding the precepts, line upon line of the foundation of his good teaching of the gospel.
EXTRACT C: The bible is not open to interpretation (translation), the gospel according to Jesus Christ. The final extract demonstrates that lyrical interpretation causes a space for interpretation, re-interpretation and misinterpretation. This tips the narrative of the film toward both characters showing the visible wrangling with their belief system.
There is a shift in semblance of the characters – implicitly considered through their thoughts and explicitly mimicked
in their actions. They move from being hostages to a sober, horizontal prose (rhetoric and description) and their thinking evolves along a more calligraphic line adding levity to the situation, encouraging a more lyrical and vertical trajectory for the spoken communication to flourish with provocation.
Loading more stuff…
Hmm…it looks like things are taking a while to load. Try again?