Tintin Forums

Tintin Forums / Curious about Tintin? (Non-album specific) /

Tintin and co - an unseen rebus-like writing

Page  Page 1 of 4:  1  2  3  4  Next » 

#1 · Posted: 9 Feb 2005 19:38
Here is a new thread (an offshoot from another thread, "Most preposterous piece of Tintin "scholarship" ever?") for your convenience...

1. Please listen to Herge's words when he speaks about his childhood, and about a message incrusted in his work, and about his heroes being himself, and about his admitting the presence of a 'martingale' in Tintin (i.e. something that controls the 'chance' in his work, just like a proverb does control the sequence of its rebus' images, thus allowing itself to be found out...)

2. Please think about the circean mechanisms happening when you read a rebus, and admit its reading would be impossible without some 'thought transmission', i.e. you have to know its trend, such as these images are telling a 'proverb', and then search among the 'proverb data' of your memory, or in a proverb list to find it...

But the day a rebus tells a 'novel's title' for instance, or anything different, you won't be able to find it, if you keep expecting a 'proverb'...

3. Please refer to my 7th of February message posted on the "Most preposterous piece of Tintin "scholarship" ever?" thread, then search 'yamilah bd' via Google, then click on 'ignored pages', you'll get then about 35 items named 'parlons BD classiques': here you are! Please read these ignored threads...

4. Please read also pages 24-26 in L'Archipel Tintin, by B.Peeters and others, where I give a clue to 'unseen rebus-like writing' in Herge's art, a 'childish' clue visible as early as 'Soviets' 1st page. This book gives another clue: Herge's 'image writing' has nothing to do with exegeses about the politically correct and visible world of Tintin. Nor does belong nor interests any presently known human science, nor does even refer to Scott McCloud's 'Invisible Art' book...

As Amanda hinted, a special kind of human could be at work in Tintin, thus human science books on his subject are obviously no place to develop the 'graphic character' of this puzzling 'object' (Latin 'rebus'), nor is the WWW, consequently...

5. At last, please take it easy with Amanda, who might know a bit more than she pretends. I found out she is a lecturer in French in Monash University, Melbourne, and also works in a Center for cross-cultural research, so her study might not be as preposterous as its sounds. All the problem is that 'image reading' ('steganography') is a media but does not belong to human sciences as it should, i.e. to mediologic studies: the fact that this hidden but efficient writing is not taught at University might have something to do with its dangerously 'castrating' effect on literary creation, on rhetorical speech, as well as on many other 'vocabulary displays'...

[Post edited by Admin: to reduce confusion, I have added a reference to the original thread from which this is an offshoot.]
#2 · Posted: 9 Feb 2005 20:22 · Edited by: Ranko
#3 · Posted: 9 Feb 2005 21:53
Sorry Yam, no idea what you are talking about, no idea who Amanda is, never heard of her

Can you please clarify?

#4 · Posted: 9 Feb 2005 21:55
Oh I see, it's all Harrocks fault, you were told to start a new thread as an offshoot from that article than made no sense thread. I guess Amanda is the author

#5 · Posted: 9 Feb 2005 22:50
I understood half of your first paragraph, yamilah -- and then there was this:

2. Please think about the circean mechanisms happening when you read a rebus, and admit its reading would be impossible without some 'thought transmission' etc.

What's lost on me is yours -- and Amanda's -- point.

There are times when people look too deeply into somethings, I think.
#6 · Posted: 9 Feb 2005 23:07
Thanks for your pertinent remarks, jockosjungle.
Indeed, Amanda is the PhD author of the 'preposterous' Melbourne university publication studied in another thread on this website, whereas Yamilah lives in Europe and is a MD, so it can't be the same person.
You could maybe ask her directly on her campus, and give her the opportunity to precise what meant her no sense thread exactly? According the WWW, her e-mail address is Amanda.Macdonald [at] anu.edu.au
Her answer might be interesting!
#7 · Posted: 9 Feb 2005 23:20 · Edited by: tybaltstone
I think the interesting question underlying all this is: is it worth looking into (or beyond) an artist's work at elements that the author did not intend, or was not aware of when the work was created?

My view is no. I'm interested in what the creator intends, perhaps to slightly deeper subconcious levels. I think some of this discussion takes it too far, but maybe it's just too far my own limited capacity.

Am I interested in possibly subconcious parallels between Hergé's childhood and the content of his Tintin stories? Yes, to a degree. Am I interested in whether a Tintin story reflects the meta-physical shape of the supraverse? No, sorry.

I actually think it's a waste of time and effort (but then I'm a bit Plebian). I like a good adventure story. I'm also interested in the work being a reflection of the artist, but that's about as far as it goes - for me.

P.S - supraverse may well be a word, but I used it because it sounds impressive.
UK Correspondent
#8 · Posted: 9 Feb 2005 23:34
This is something that I've wondered about for years but never came to a conclusion over - how much of the deep meaning drawn from an author or artist's work was actually put into it consciously ?

For example, I've spent many an English class studying every single line of a novel, or a Shakespeare play, and subconscious meaning can be found in each line. But did the author intend it ? To be honest, I can't accept that each line of a novel is crafted so that an alternative meaning is hidden within it.

Likewise, I don't believe that all of these indepth parallels exist in the Tintin books. Hergé wanted to tell a story clearly with the images serving to advance the storyline in the most fluid way possible. Therefore, I'm not willing to accept that there are all these hidden ideas and devices within the images. You can read too deeply into anything and draw conclusions based on your own understanding, but probably not what the author intended.
#9 · Posted: 10 Feb 2005 00:00
Thank you Tybaltstone.
Please think of Herge's remark about his 'other means' to study Tintin, means that differed from what had been done so far, i.e. books written by human science disciples.
Please consider Herge's remark to B.Peeters implied he wanted Tintin to be read that 'other' way too.
Please remember that when 'human' science is evoked in his work, its in contrast with 'another world of science' (see Flight 714', p45 as far as I can remember).
Please don't forget Herge always insisted about the clear line's 'legibility'.
Can a rebus be unconscious or subconscious? I personally doubt it very much, although I must confess I am no psychiatrist.
All this put together implies 'another science', a technique ('steganalysis') that allows us to read images, provided they are first set in the fit sequential order of a rebus...
#10 · Posted: 10 Feb 2005 00:07
Ok ok...I didnt want to reveal this ...but due to recent revelations, I feel its my duty to share something with all the rest of you

if you CAREFULLY read the tintin books backwards under a 75watt tungsten lamplight ...(sigh)
you discover that tintin is actually a raging alcaholic who's libido makes Casanova look like a jesuit priest

there, I said it.

Page  Page 1 of 4:  1  2  3  4  Next » 

Please be sure to familiarize yourself with the Forum Posting Guidelines.

Disclaimer: Tintinologist.org assumes no responsibility for any content you post to the forums/web site. Staff reserve the right to remove any submitted content which they deem in breach of Tintinologist.org's Terms of Use. If you spot anything on Tintinologist.org that you think is inappropriate, please alert the moderation team. Sometimes things slip through, but we will always act swiftly to remove unauthorised material.


  Forgot your password?
Please sign in to post. New here? Sign up!