optical illusion II

[calimac]

A comment on my previous post has prompted me to ask a follow-up - of the same kind but a slightly different order. This time it wasn't me who was confused, but somebody else.

This happened years ago in an apa, and I don't remember who were the people involved, and I certainly don't have the original photo. But this one I found on an image search - which is of political activists in Lebanon celebrating the passage of a domestic violence bill - will do as a substitute. I am making up names for everyone involved.



The context was that a member, whom we'll call Greg, was writing a long tale about some people whom he knew but none of the readers did, and as illustration he provided a photo of some of them together with some other people who weren't in the story. For a caption, he wrote, "The person at the furthest left is Sarah. To her left is Nadine."

And another member, call him Zach, commented, "Huh? What does the word 'furthest' mean to you?"

So my questions for you are:

1) Are you confused by Greg's caption?

2) If you're not confused, do you understand why Zach was confused?

3) Which one is Sarah, and which one Nadine, anyway? Identify them by their hairstyle and clothing.

Comments

[margdean56.livejournal.com]

1. It took me a moment to sort it out, but I think I understand what he's getting at.

2. I can understand why Zach is confused, because it seems to me that Greg is asking the viewer to do a perspective flip in mid-caption.

3. I assume the woman with dark clothing, hair down and glasses is Sarah, and the one with stars on her sweater is Nadine.

[mneme]

1. No, I'm not. It's clear, despite the double-take.
2. Yes. The meaning of "left" changes between sentences, because the first time it's relative to the viewer, and the second time it's relative to a character.
3. Sarah has a black coat with grey trim and shades. Nadine is star-struck.

[whswhs.livejournal.com]

His writing is confusing verbally. It appears that he means that the woman with sunglasses is Sarah, and the woman with stars on her clothing is Nadine; Sarah is furthest left on the page/screen, and Nadine is standing on Sarah's left-hand side in the reference frame of the women in the picture (that is, to her right on the page). So we have what is technically called an equivocation on the word "left."

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

Yours was the comment on the previous post that I wrote this post in reply to, since based on that I'd guess you'd consider the woman with the dark clothes, reddish curly hair, and no glasses to be Sarah. Though who you would think Nadine was in that case, I have no idea. Out of frame?

[whswhs.livejournal.com]

No, the answer is simpler than that. You and I had discussed this question so recently that it was still in my mind, and so the cognitive frame of "perspective of the people in the picture/perspective of the person looking at the picture" was right there ready to be applied. You need to test this on the Bill Stoddard of an alternate timeline who doesn't read your blog and isn't primed for the question.

[akirlu.livejournal.com]

I'm not confused by Greg's caption, but I do understand why Zach was confused, and Sarah is wearing her hair down, has glasses and seems to be in a dark coat and scarf, while Nadine has her hair back, no glasses, and a dark sweater with big white stars on it.

On a similar note, I can hardly ever feel confident about what is meant by "stage left." The explanation about Queen Elizabeth only confused me.

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

Since you're the only person with any possible access to his thinking, what would he have said?

[vgqn.livejournal.com]

Yes, it's confusing. My first reaction was that he was saying Nadine was even further left, out of the picture frame. Reading the comments, I now understand the change of reference for left, so agree with the others that Nadine is wearing stars. But it's badly written. I think photo captions usually retain the reader's point of view, so saying "Nadine is immediately to the right of Sarah" (or even "next to Sarah", in this case), would have been MUCH clearer.

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

It may help with "stage left/right" to remember that the other perspective is called "house right/left".

What I have trouble with is upstage vs. downstage. To upstage a person means to hog the area in front of them, but upstage is in the back. This causes me to have to stop and think, every time.

Queen Elizabeth?

[whswhs.livejournal.com]

"The person at the furthest left . . . okay, Sarah is the one in black with snaky hair. To her left . . . huh? That's outside the frame? Why would they leave Nadine out of the picture if they're going to talk about her? Maybe they mean that Sarah is the one at the left of the picture, with sunglasses? Well, then, Nadine must be standing outside the frame at that side. Or maybe they mean that Sarah is the one in sunglasses and Nadine is standing at her left hand, in stars? That doesn't seem right, because it's two different meanings of left. Hmm, could Sarah be the one in black, and Nadine be the one with the beige rectangle? No, that doesn't work, that's "right" in both senses of the word. Better query the author to make sure."

Revise "at the extreme left of the photograph . . . to her right" and query "AUTHOR: As meant?"

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

Oh, I agree: it would have been much clearer, and I wouldn't have written the caption as Greg did. But it was the fact that Nadine clearly could not be out of the picture that meant that I was not confused at all.

Had Sarah been any of the middle four, I would not have been confused either, but I would have wondered if Greg was confused. For I have seen captions using the "her left/his right" perspective where, if you work through them all, it turns out that the caption-writer FORGOT that "her left" is the viewer's right and meant "the left of" rather than the "her left" that was written.

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

Is "at the extreme left of the photograph . . . to her right" the alternate you's proposal for a revision? That doesn't work for me, as it puts Nadine out of the photo again, beyond Sunglasses Woman.

"beige rectangle" raises another interesting perspective issue. As the rectangle (which I'd call white) is purely an accidental temporary artifact of the fit of her sweater and the position of the other woman's arm, I don't see it as one, though indubitably it is. I would describe her as "reddish sweater and white blouse."

[(Anonymous)]

I would have been momentarily confused by Greg's caption had I not chuckled at whswhs's response to the other post yesterday.
-MTD/neb

[houseboatonstyx.livejournal.com]

Before reading the comments....

At first reading I was confused: left of the furthest left, sounds like something by George MacDonald or William Buckley.

After re-reading the context, oh, maybe it was the story character furthest left, not furthest in the picture.

Finally, after looking at the picture trying to work out who was Nadine -- okay, that explains it, Sarah's left is not the picture's left, d'uhhh.

[whswhs.livejournal.com]

To me "at the extreme left of the photograph" establishes a reference frame, within which "to her right" means "to her right as you scan across the photograph." But word choices like this are tricky; that's why we have author queries. Perhaps "standing at her left side" would be clearer by making the shift of reference frame explicit?

[houseboatonstyx.livejournal.com]

Well, when you upstage someone, you are going further toward the audience, which puts you downstage of zim, which means they are upstage of you. Up/down stage is relative; the line between parts of the stage moves when the center of attention moves, and you have moved the line.

Queen Elizabeth? Well, wherever she sits is the head of the table....

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

The relativeness of upstage/downstage is not the issue. It's your first sentence which is so counter-intuitive. If they are upstage of you, then what you are doing should be called "downstaging", because you are downstage. It's what they are doing which should be "upstaged", but instead they're "being upstaged." By you!

I do understand the terminology, but it's the opposite of what I'd call logical, so that's why the metaphor makes me have to stop and work out which is which, every time I hear the actual stage terms being used.

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

For me, the modifier "her" immediately changes the reference frame to her perspective. I guess that for you it does not. Interesting.

haven't read other comments yet

[thnidu.livejournal.com]

1. was, just briefly. mainly confused at why he wrote it like that.
2. sure do!
3. Sarah is in black and wearing glasses. Nadine is wearing a big-star print.

Amplifying: "at the furthest left" is from our POV. "at her left" is from Sarah's; since she's facing us, her left is our right. I'd've written "next to her", since she's at one edge of the picture and there's no possible ambiguity that way.

[houseboatonstyx.livejournal.com]

"Next to her" is better than my thought, which was "at her left hand".

[houseboatonstyx.livejournal.com]

The customary grammar would be likewise counter-intuitive to you, then. "By moving in front of her, I upstaged her" -- transitive verb with 'her' as direct object.

"I downstaged myself from that cluttered tableau, by moving toward the footlights" -- intransitive verb, or whatever they call self-referring.

[thnidu.livejournal.com]

Yes, let's avoid the mirror-imaging issue entirely.

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

Right. "I upstaged her" makes it sound as if I went upstage of her. But that's wrong, so I have to stop and figure it out.

[kalimac.livejournal.com]

btw, how does that line about Queen Elizabeth explain anything about "stage left"? That's what akirlu said, an "explanation about Queen Elizabeth" regarding "stage left".

[(Anonymous)]

1. No.
2. No.
3. 'Sarah' has dark glasses. 'Nadine' has stars upon thars.

The previous picture offered genuine grounds for confusion. This one is pretty straightforward.

--John R.