Nothing. This word is the central idea behind most if not all of the first part of Turner's essay. The question of whether "nothing" refers to a lack of anything, or is instead being used as a noun, is a difficult one; it can function as either. The first way of looking at "nothing" implies a sort of lack of anything concrete. Nothing matters. The emphasis is on what is not acting or being. On the other side of this equation, we have "nothing" functioning as a subject. Nothing matters. Meaning that "nothing" is actually "something".
One easy metaphor I use to understand this difference, is to relate it to painting. A canvas may have "nothing" painted on it yet; it is completely blank. In this state, there is nothing painted. However, after a painting is complete, there is almost always still places where different amounts of the white canvas still show through the colors. These places are important, even critical, to the portrayal of the picture. The "nothing" then, is a specific important noun. The nothing (does) matters.
This, I believe after much close analysis, is the point and differentiation Turner is trying to explain in the beginning of his essay.
-AS
No comments:
Post a Comment