Time in fiction PDF
Preview Time in fiction
OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,18/12/2015,SPi Time in Fiction OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,18/12/2015,SPi OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,18/12/2015,SPi Time in Fiction Craig Bourne and Emily Caddick Bourne 1 OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,18/12/2015,SPi 3 GreatClarendonStreet,Oxford,OX26DP, UnitedKingdom OxfordUniversityPressisadepartmentoftheUniversityofOxford. ItfurtherstheUniversity’sobjectiveofexcellenceinresearch,scholarship, andeducationbypublishingworldwide.Oxfordisaregisteredtrademarkof OxfordUniversityPressintheUKandincertainothercountries ©CraigBourneandEmilyCaddickBourne2016 Themoralrightsoftheauthorshavebeenasserted FirstEditionpublishedin2016 Impression:1 Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproduced,storedin aretrievalsystem,ortransmitted,inanyformorbyanymeans,withoutthe priorpermissioninwritingofOxfordUniversityPress,orasexpresslypermitted bylaw,bylicenceorundertermsagreedwiththeappropriatereprographics rightsorganization.Enquiriesconcerningreproductionoutsidethescopeofthe aboveshouldbesenttotheRightsDepartment,OxfordUniversityPress,atthe addressabove Youmustnotcirculatethisworkinanyotherform andyoumustimposethissameconditiononanyacquirer PublishedintheUnitedStatesofAmericabyOxfordUniversityPress 198MadisonAvenue,NewYork,NY10016,UnitedStatesofAmerica BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationData Dataavailable LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2015948042 ISBN 978–0–19–967531–9 PrintedinGreatBritainby ClaysLtd,StIvesplc LinkstothirdpartywebsitesareprovidedbyOxfordingoodfaithand forinformationonly.Oxforddisclaimsanyresponsibilityforthematerials containedinanythirdpartywebsitereferencedinthiswork. OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,18/12/2015,SPi For mops, pops and family OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,18/12/2015,SPi OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,18/12/2015,SPi Preface Once upon a time, around eight years ago, we had our first conversation about fictionaltime.Itwasabouthowseriouslytotakethepasttenseincertainwritten fictions, and whether stories should generally be understood as reporting what has already fictionally happened. What we said then has not made it into this book, but it began an interest which was initially in fiction and tense, and expanded as we came to see how other questions about time and about fiction interact,andhownewquestionscanbegeneratedattheintersectionofthesetwo areasofphilosophy. The opportunity to review Robin Le Poidevin’s book The Images of Time (OxfordUniversityPress,2007)madeusawareofhowrichthetopicoffictional time could be, and it motivated much of our thinking. (The review appears in PhilosophicalQuarterly(2010),60:201–4.)Eventhoughmostofourdiscussions ofLePoidevin’sviewsendinusdisagreeingwithhim,ourbookwouldnothave been written were it not for his work. We have benefited enormously from Robin’s identification of the complexities and possibilities inherent in a philo- sophical approach to time in fiction, as well as from the conversations we have hadwithRobinaboutthetopicovertheyears. OurothermajorintellectualdebtistoDavidLewis,whoseviewshaveinspired muchofourapproach.Aswenotethroughout,however,ourapproachisoftenin important and substantial respects different from Lewis’s, not least in the role thatpossibleworldsplayinunderstandingfiction. Aside from questions about the contents of this book, the question we have beenaskedmostoftenishowwehavegoneaboutco-authoringthisbook.Apart from the first two introductory chapters, pretty much every sentence has been written together. This method of writing is unusual in philosophy but to those philosophers who have a partner with the same temperament and who are in circumstanceswhichallowforit,wehighlyrecommendthiswayofworking. Wearegratefultotheaudiencesatvarioustalks,seminars,andconferencesat which versions of some of the chapters have been presented. Versions of Chapter3 were presented at the University of Hertfordshire in 2008 and the University of Cambridge in 2009. Versions of Chapter4 were presented at a conference on The Open Future at the Universityof Barcelona in 2011, at Meiji University and the British Council in Tokyo in 2012, at the Shakespeare anni- versary conference Shakespeare 450 in Paris in 2014, and at a conference we OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,18/12/2015,SPi viii PREFACE organizedonShakespeare:ThePhilosopheratHertfordshirein2014.Aversionof partsofChapters6and7waspresentedatHertfordshireandBirkbeck,University of London in 2011. A version of Chapter7 was presented at the How the Light GetsInphilosophyfestivalatHay-on-Wye,Walesin2012,andatUniversityof Rijeka,Croatiain2013.PartsofChapter8and14werepresentedataconference on Ways of Knowing: Art and Science at Hertfordshire in 2010, which was published as conference proceedings: ‘On What We May Infer from Artistic and Scientific Representations of Time’ in Writing Visual Culture [formerly Working Papers in Design], vol. 5: Ways of Knowing (2012). A version of Chapter9waspresentedataworkshoponArtandthePhilosophyofTimeatthe UniversityofNottinghamin2014.AversionofpartsofChapter10waspresented atCambridgein2010ataworkshoponMarkSainsbury’sFictionandFictional- ism.AversionofChapter11waspresentedatHertfordshirein2011.Earlymaterial forChapter12onindefinitenesswaspresentedattheJointSessionoftheAristotel- ianSocietyandMindAssociationin2009,andaversionofChapter12wasgivenata conference on Modal Metaphysics: Issues on the (Im)possible at the Institute of Philosophy, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava in 2013. A version of Chapter13waspresentedataworkshoponScientificModelsandEverydayThinking on the occasion of Elliott Sober’s Francis Bacon Lecture at the University of Hertfordshire in 2011. And there have been many other informal presentations and conversations at the institutions where we have worked while writing this book: the University of Cambridge, Birkbeck, and the Institute of Philosophy at the Universityof London, and especially the University of Hertfordshire. Weare gratefulforthosediscussionswithourfriends,students,andcolleagues. Parts of Chapter5 are reproduced with kind permission from Springer Science+ BusinessMedia:AroundtheTree:SemanticandMetaphysicalIssuesConcerning Branching and the Open Future, ‘Fictional Branching Time?’, Synthese Library Vol.361,2013,81–94,editedbyFabriceCorreiaandAndreaIacona,Dordrecht: Springer,andwearegratefulforcommentsonthatchapterfromtheeditors. There are many philosophers and other friends who have been significant to us while writing the book, whether for their conversations about or interest in its contents, or for their support and company in general. They include Sam Coleman, Tim Crane, Gregory Currie, Ian Duncan, Stacie Friend, Oren Goldschmidt,DanHutto,ClareJarmy,DavidKelnar,RebeccaLingwood,Derek Matravers, Hugh Mellor, Sandra Nelson, Alex Oliver, James Sharp, Cait and AnnabelledeWinterandfamily,ourvariousfictionalfriends,andourfamilies. Emily is grateful for the support of a Jacobsen Research Fellowship at the Institute of Philosophy from 2011 to 2014, and to the Arts and Humanities ResearchCouncilforfundingearlierPhDresearchwhichhasfedintothisbook. OUPCORRECTEDPROOF–FINAL,18/12/2015,SPi PREFACE ix Craig is grateful for the support of a University of Hertfordshire Social Sciences, Arts and Humanities Research Institute (SSAHRI) Award from 2010 to2011. Lastly,wewouldliketo thanktwoanonymousreadersforOxford University Press—whose positive feedback and constructive criticism have been helpful in preparing the final version, not just where this is mentioned explicitly but at severalotherpointsaswell—andPeterMomtchiloffforhissupport,enthusiasm, andpatiencethroughout.
The list of books you might like
