Send message to Author

Paper short abstract

As an intimate genre, legend anticipates a relationship between teller and listener thicker than that between both teller and listener and a third party, whether that be a character within the account or an imagined other, who interprets the utterance otherwise. In contrasts, our nature is explored.

Paper long abstract

Contemporary legends are recreated scripts told in intimate contexts: "I" (who has, in your eyes, some kind of identity and embodies some kind of rationale to be heeded) shape my words to best tell "you" (who have, in my eyes, some kind of identity and some kind of rationale for needing to hear it) of the events of a purported incident. This is as true for direct face-to-face encounter as it is for social media as it is for print publication although, knowing my audience to likely be larger, I shape it best for multiple identities. The purported incident is incongruous with expectations: were everyone involved to act as we know best to act the event would have ended predictably. To establish its comprehensibility and resolve that incongruity, we (singularly or collaboratively) bring something else to our interpretations, a way of seeing the world that would provide the motivations that led to that outcome. We know that way is not universally held, and is subject to doubt, a doubt that may be ours or theirs. While we may inevitably take a stand on the truth or falsity (or fictiveness) of the narrative, it is the assertion of its contested plausibility ("I see why some people would believe this." "I see why some people would not.") that reveals contrast. Lest this sound too Pollyannaish, the same interpretive exercise can reveal contrast between teller and listener, further contextualising that relationship and utterances to come.