Walton Muddle

The paradox of emotional responses to fiction, be it film, theatre or literature, stems from how a rational being can feel a true emotion about a character in a play when they are aware that said character is not real. How can one be reduced to tears when watching bambi when no real animals are harmed? Further more why would we actively pursue a medium that invokes feelings of sadness or even terror despite these feelings being considered negative emotions. I will attempt to explain how one philosopher describes this paradox as a muddle and what he means by it. I will then using his writings as reference try to explain his solution to this muddle which involved him separating emotional responses to fiction and emotional responses to real world stimuli by categorising the fictional responses as quasi emotions. I will then argue that in terms of the example of fear his theory is an effective solution to the paradox.

The 'muddle' that Walton refers to, in relation to our apparent emotional reaction to fictional characters, could be interpreted as one of purpose, action and consequence. The primary emotion used in the example's provided by Walton relate to the emotion of fear. The purpose of fear one could argue is that of self preservation, to fear some thing or
The reality is I am not in any danger from the clown and as I sit reading the book in the safety of my living room I am fully aware of this fact. If a stranger was in my living room brandishing a knife and walking towards me in a threatening manner then my fear would have a purpose, in this case to motivate me in removing myself from the reach of the knife