Talk:Defamiliarization

[Untitled]

there are some problems with this article.

ostranenie is not an affect of the satirical, but meant to be a universal principal of art. while dadaism and surrealism can be taken as examples of ostranenie, it is only because the method of their art is fairly overt. additionally, ostranenie only distinguishes poetry from prose in the most formal, superficial manner; any application of literary technique (poetry and prose, ) involves a peculiar brand of ostranenie, in the preparation of the understanding towards the delineation of a subject and/or object.

отстранение is wrong. while the (oт) prefix is allegory suitable for the hypothetical movement away from the readily-available Notion, the (o) prefix correctly describes the continuous aspect of the "movement" of estrangement.

ostranenie (as described in Art as Technique) does not refer to a specific formal technique, but rather refers to all uses of technique.

the literary references chosen seem highly tangential without a great deal more exposition.

links should also be added  Actio 06:12, 11 February 2007 (UTC)actio[reply]

ostranenie (остранение) is wrong otstranenie (отстранение) is right Synthmax 21:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding (mind you, without knowledge of Russian) is that though there is such a word "otstranenie" meaning "pushing aside, dismissal" the word "ostranenie" is supposed to be a neologism Viktor Shklovsky coined to convey the specialized sense he wanted of having the familiar and commonplace made strange or alien. Beyond that, I couldn't venture to say, but I have seen this confusion pop up elsewhere, which receives the same response. In the article it duly credits Shklovsky. Batula 19:13, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The portuguese link is incorrect, although I got here from the English link on the Portuguese páge, so it works in that direction. The portuguese link goes to http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/V-effekt when it should go to http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estranhamento - I don't know how to fix it though - sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.138.192.135 (talk) 15:40, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How exactly does this differ from the distancing effect?

I first thought it might be better to merge this article in the distancing effect². However it seems that both differ by defamiliarization being a technique of art (and especially literature) in general and the distancing effect just being a technique of theatre with both however having the same purpose. If that is the case I think it should be made clearer how those two differ in the article.

² btw this is one of the first wiki-articles that I better understood by the German article whose name is "Verfremdungseffekt" - I find "Alienation effect" (which was the name by which I found the English article) a truly misleading name for this: alienation always originates from the spectator so to say; however this is a technique used by the artists to have their play being perceived in another way. If it would just be called "alienation effect" it would have to just focus on the effects this kind of invoked alienation has for a spectator; and not on the technique which invoked it (the German translation for alienation would be Entfremdung; with Verfremdung being sth different).

--Fixuture (talk) 22:45, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Examples?

Reading through this article, it seems that it may be better served by including an example of literary defamiliarization so as to help the reader better understand the subject. Does there exist any common example that could be included in the article? DeemDeem52 (talk) 00:38, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this?Omeganian (talk) 13:09, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Distancing effect?

It seems that these two terms are interchangeable. Are they? 151.71.77.127 (talk) 21:13, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]